NUMERICAL CALCULATION OF J-INTEGRAL USING FINITE

ELEMENTS METHOD
BAHRUDIN HRNJICA
University of Bihać – Faculty of Technical Engineering Bihać, Bihać, [email protected]

FADIL ISLAMOVIĆ
University of Bihać – Faculty of Technical Engineering Bihać, Bihać, [email protected]

DŽENANA GAČO
University of Bihać – Faculty of Technical Engineering Bihać, Bihać, [email protected]
ESAD BAJRAMOVIĆ
University of Bihać – Faculty of Technical Engineering Bihać, Bihać, [email protected]

Abstract: This paper presents the procedures and results of numerical determination of fracture mechanics parameters
in condition of elastic-plastic fracture mechanics. The finite element analyses were performed on standard Single-edge
notched bend, SENB, specimen of structural steel. Discretization was performed on three specimens with different crack
lengths. The results of numerical analysis were compared with the experimental results, in order to evaluate numerical
models. The results of analysis show good approximation of numerically determined J integral compared with
experimental results.

Keywords: fracture mechanics, J integral, finite elements method, numerical integration, SENB specimen.

necessary to solve ordinary and partial differential

1. INTRODUCTION equations. The wide application of the method is
confirmed by the fact that natural phenomena are very
Finite Element Method or FEM has become the similar because they are described by the same
recognized method and an integral part of every CAE differential equations, and only differ in the type of
(Computer Aided Engineering) system. It is a useful variables, initial and boundary conditions[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].
method in the analysis of many complex systems in which
we live. In the beginning of its development FEM was FEM has been successfully used in fracture mechanics
considered as an expanded matrix method of structural from its very beginnings. This paper will apply finite
analysis, i.e. analysis of stress-strain state of the structure element method in calculating the J integral, parameters
[1]. of elastic-plastic fracture mechanics. Fracture mechanics
parameters are generally obtained experimentally, but
The rapid development of FEM mostly is due to the rapid such experiments are not cheap to be conducted on a daily
and successful development of computer science and basis for each individual case[3,7].
software development in which algorithms based on FEM
were successfully implemented. Software packages for Efforts to replace, to some extent, the experimental
FEM provided accurate and convenient tool to calculate method with numerical methods is a logical approach.
the system of algebraic equations, which form one of the With the development of computer science, hardware and
basic features of FEM. software solutions it is possible to simulate almost all
natural processes. Therefore, interest has increased in the
Today FEM is applied in a wide range of applied development of a software module to calculate the J
sciences, from engineering and bio-mechanics to integral as one of the most important parameters of
electromagnetic fields and thermodynamics. FEM is not fracture mechanics[5].
only a method of simple linear elastic stress-strain
analysis, but has proved to successfully solve elastic- Today, in the latest versions of Ansys, Abaqus and other
plastic problems, problems of complex non-linear, non- popular software packages for numerical analysis there
stationary dynamics, non-linear and non-stationary heat are also modules for calculating the J integral, as well as
transfer, fluid mechanics, bio-mechanics and other [2]. other parameters of fracture mechanics[8-10].

The application of finite element method today is

widespread primarily due to ease of implementation and
numerical approach to solving differential equations.
Finite element method can be used wherever it is
1
 TITLE OF THE PAPER IN ENGLISH OTEH 2016

2. NUMERICAL DETERMINATION OF J for J integral that can be numerically calculated.

INTEGRAL Strain energy can be described as:
Numerical determination of fracture mechanics
1 u x  u u y  u x u y 
parameters has been developed for the last 40 years, Ws   xx   xy  x     yy  . (2)
during which a dozen methods were developed. 2  x  y x  x y 
Generally, all methods can be divided into point matching
methods and energy methods. The first methods y axis growth is described as:
determine the stress intensity factor over the stress and y
strain in the structure, while others determine the strain dy  d . (3)

energy that was used to calculate the stress intensity
factor. Stress vector T and movement growth is obtained as
scalar product:
The advantage of the energy method is that it can be
applied to non-linear areas, while the disadvantages are u i  u u y  . (4)
Ti   ( xx n1   xy n2 ) x  ( xy n1   yy n2 ) 
impossibility of separating the energy of strain according x  x y 
to the models of crack separation. All of today's modern Contour differential is calculated as follows:
numerical methods for the determination of fracture
2
mechanics parameters are based on the method of energy  u   u y
2
 , (5)
domain integral [3]. d   x     d
 x   y 
Due to the fact that current software for stress analysis
calculate stress-strain conditions in integral, i.e. Gaussian for d  =const.
points, numerical calculation of J integral is based on
these points. For this reason, the contour around the crack
If expressions (2), (3), (4) and (5) are inserted in (1) we
tip is observed in the integral, not the finite elements
get an expression which is suitable for integration. The
nodes [4]. Numerical calculation of J integral begins with
contour through which the integration is conducted has
known expression for the contour integral.
been chosen in order to fit the elements of stiffness
The general form of J integral, where axis x is parallel to matrix. For this reason, the contour must pass through the
crack growth direction: Gaussian integration points. All expressions included in
the equation (1) are known and can be obtained directly
  du  through the standard programs for numerical analysis.
J    Ws dy  Ti i d  (1)
The evaluation of the final expression is done through
a   dx 
integration points along the contours (Figure 1), so we get
where stands that: a discrete form of equation (1):
ng
 Ti – stress vector, J   W g I g ( g , g ) (6)
g 1
 ui - movement vector,
 W – strain energy, where stands that:
 Wg – Gaussian weight factor,
 d - contour arch length.  ng – number of integration points,
 Ig – integrand calculated for each integration
point g.

Index g denotes that the values contained in the

expression (6) are taken in the Gaussian integral points,
and not in the nodes of the finite element[3].

3. THE RESULTS OF THE NUMERICAL

ANALYSIS

The paper presents the numerical determination of J

integral for SENB specimen with initial fatigue crack of
length a0. Numerical analysis was conducted over three
SENB specimens of the same dimensions, which are in
the process of fatigue with different values of the initial
Figure 1 Finite elements around crack tip and defining fatigue crack. Initial fatigue crack of SENB specimen was
closed area around the crack tip geometrically processed according to standard ASTM
1820 [11]. Specimen modelling was conducted based on
geometric characteristics, as well as finite element
By defining each component of J integral presented in network. Numerical determination of J integral was
expression (1) we can get a suitable analytical expression conducted based on experimental determination of J
2
 TITLE OF THE PAPER IN ENGLISH OTEH 2016

integral so that load input data, crack length and As can be seen in Figure 3, the numerical analysis of
mechanical properties of material were simulated. As stress and strain was conducted prior to the numerical
previously noted, finite element mesh was formerly determination of J integral, followed by the process of
conducted around the crack tip, which was defined numerical determination of J integral for integral, and not
through a singular finite elements. for finite elements nodes.

Figure 4 Description of numerical and experimental

values of J integral for SENB-1 specimen[5]

Figure 4 presents comparative results of numerical

Figure 2 2D numerical model of the SENB specimen analysis and experimental results for the specimen of the
with generated finite elements mesh same geometrical values.

Figure 2 shows the model of the SENB specimen with

generated mesh. As can be seen, the specimen was
modeled as a 2D model, whereas finite element mesh was
built from quadrangle or quadrilateral finite elements
comprising eight nodes. Four nodes are at the apex of the
rectangle, while the other four nodes are located in the
middle of the sides (see Figure 2). Singular finite
elements enables greater precision and interpolation
functions can better describe the change in load and other
sizes through the nodes of finite elements. As for the
crack tip, rectangular elements degenerate into triangular
(Figure 2).

The nodes that are located in the middle of the sides that
are connected in the crack tip, move up to ¼ in the linear-
elastic, and ½ in the elastic-plastic fracture mechanics.
Figure 5 Description of numerical and experimental
This defines the degree of singularity that is 1/√r in a
values of J integral for SENB-2 specimen [5]
linear-elastic, and 1/r in the elastic-plastic analysis.
Previously conducted pre-processing implied the variation
of crack size at a specified interval, according to the
experimental results of crack length and corresponding
load.

Figure 3 Stress distribution during experimental J integral

determination

3
 TITLE OF THE PAPER IN ENGLISH OTEH 2016

software for numerical analysis, such as Ansys, Abaqus,

etc., have modules for numerical determination of fracture
mechanics parameters: J Integral, stress intensity factor,
strain energy, as well as other features of fracture
mechanics.

References
[1] K.J. Bathe, Finite Element Procedures, Prentice Hell,
New Jersey, 1996.
[2] T.L. Anderson, Fracture Mechanics Fundamentals
and Application Third Edition, Taylor & Francis,
New York, 2005.
[3] S. Mohammadi, Extended Finite Element Method,
Teheran, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2008.
Figure 6 Description of numerical and experimental [4] J.N. Reddy, An Introduction to the Finite Element
values of J integral for SENB-3 specimen [5] Third Edition. Higher Education, New York, 2006
[5] B. Hrnjica, “Numeričko-evolucijski pristup
Results of numerical analysis in Figures 5 and 6 depict a određivanja parametara mehanike loma posuda pod
comparison of the results with the corresponding
pritiskom”, Doktorska disertacija, Univerzitet u
experimental values of J integral, which show that the
Bihaću – Tehnički fakultet Bihać, 2014.
numerical results of the J Integral acquired lower values
compared to the experimental results. It may also be [6] S.S. Rao. The Finite Element Method in Engineering
observed that in all three specimens the results are closer Fifth Edition, Elsevier, New York, 2011.
to the experimental results for lower values of the ratio of [7] M. Kuna, Finite Element in Fracture Mechanics,
crack and specimen thickness (a/w), or lower values of Springer, New York, 2013.
the crack size a. [8] Y. Long, S. Cen, Z. Ling, Advanced Finite Element
Method in Structural Engineering, Springer, New
5. CONCLUSION York, 2009.
This paper presents a numerical analysis of the J integral [9] E. Madaenci, I. Guven, Finite Element Method and
on SENB specimens of different values of the initial Application in Engineering using Ansys, Springer,
fatigue crack. The results of numerical analysis show that New York, 2006.
the numerical results of the J integral are closer to the [10] S. Moaveni, Finite Element Analysis Theory and
experimental values when the crack length is lower. The Application with Ansys, Prentice-Hal Inc, New
experimental approach in determining the J Integral Jersey, 1999.
presents basic, accurate and safest method, which due to
[11] ASTM E 1820: Standard Test Method for
the complexity and cost of conducting the experiment, in
Measurement of Fracture Toughness (American
certain cases represent a very demanding process.
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,
Determination of J integral with finite elements method
1990.
presents solid alternative, and it can be used in
combination with experimental method. The importance
of numerical determination of fracture mechanics
parameters is indicated by the fact that most of today's