Relative Performance of Three Mesh-Reduction Methods in Predicting Mode III Crack-Tip Singularity

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Mukhtar,Faisal M.
Data de Publicação: 2017
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Latin American journal of solids and structures (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-78252017000701226
Resumo: Abstract Due to their robustness in handling the inherent singularity difficulties associated with crack analysis, mesh-reduction methods present an avalanche of formulations in the literature which, sometimes, entails modifications to their conventional/standard forms for better results. Although such formulations provide a pool of alternative choices to the analyst, increase in their number requires some relative assessment between them in order to guarantee optimum choice of analysis tool. The present study assesses the applicability and relative performance of three such mesh-reduction methods, namely the radial basis function (RBF) method, the boundary element method (BEM), and the method of fundamental solution (MFS) for mode III crack analysis. In order to have a common ground for performance comparison, these methods are, first, tested in their most basic forms and simplest conventional formulations possible. Failure of some of them to provide reliable results calls for some enrichments. Yet, unless where necessary, efforts are made to ensure that unnecessary computationally expensive formulations are avoided. Consequently, the BEM formulation is not altered in any way, and modifications to both the RBF and MFS are limited to enrichment by the addition of, at most, one singular term and/or the domain-decomposition technique. Verification is achieved using the literature results and/or those obtained by FEM in this study. Summary of the relative advantages and limitations of the methods for mode III crack analysis is given to serve as a yard-stick based on which the choice of one over the others may be influenced.
id ABCM-1_f9e29698c4d668885198b1d4f3d8bc79
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1679-78252017000701226
network_acronym_str ABCM-1
network_name_str Latin American journal of solids and structures (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Relative Performance of Three Mesh-Reduction Methods in Predicting Mode III Crack-Tip SingularityMode III crackscrack-tip singularityradial basis functionboundary element methodmethod of fundamental solutionenriched formulationAbstract Due to their robustness in handling the inherent singularity difficulties associated with crack analysis, mesh-reduction methods present an avalanche of formulations in the literature which, sometimes, entails modifications to their conventional/standard forms for better results. Although such formulations provide a pool of alternative choices to the analyst, increase in their number requires some relative assessment between them in order to guarantee optimum choice of analysis tool. The present study assesses the applicability and relative performance of three such mesh-reduction methods, namely the radial basis function (RBF) method, the boundary element method (BEM), and the method of fundamental solution (MFS) for mode III crack analysis. In order to have a common ground for performance comparison, these methods are, first, tested in their most basic forms and simplest conventional formulations possible. Failure of some of them to provide reliable results calls for some enrichments. Yet, unless where necessary, efforts are made to ensure that unnecessary computationally expensive formulations are avoided. Consequently, the BEM formulation is not altered in any way, and modifications to both the RBF and MFS are limited to enrichment by the addition of, at most, one singular term and/or the domain-decomposition technique. Verification is achieved using the literature results and/or those obtained by FEM in this study. Summary of the relative advantages and limitations of the methods for mode III crack analysis is given to serve as a yard-stick based on which the choice of one over the others may be influenced.Associação Brasileira de Ciências Mecânicas2017-08-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-78252017000701226Latin American Journal of Solids and Structures v.14 n.7 2017reponame:Latin American journal of solids and structures (Online)instname:Associação Brasileira de Engenharia e Ciências Mecânicas (ABCM)instacron:ABCM10.1590/1679-78253656info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMukhtar,Faisal M.eng2017-08-22T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1679-78252017000701226Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=1679-7825&lng=pt&nrm=isohttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpabcm@abcm.org.br||maralves@usp.br1679-78251679-7817opendoar:2017-08-22T00:00Latin American journal of solids and structures (Online) - Associação Brasileira de Engenharia e Ciências Mecânicas (ABCM)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Relative Performance of Three Mesh-Reduction Methods in Predicting Mode III Crack-Tip Singularity
title Relative Performance of Three Mesh-Reduction Methods in Predicting Mode III Crack-Tip Singularity
spellingShingle Relative Performance of Three Mesh-Reduction Methods in Predicting Mode III Crack-Tip Singularity
Mukhtar,Faisal M.
Mode III cracks
crack-tip singularity
radial basis function
boundary element method
method of fundamental solution
enriched formulation
title_short Relative Performance of Three Mesh-Reduction Methods in Predicting Mode III Crack-Tip Singularity
title_full Relative Performance of Three Mesh-Reduction Methods in Predicting Mode III Crack-Tip Singularity
title_fullStr Relative Performance of Three Mesh-Reduction Methods in Predicting Mode III Crack-Tip Singularity
title_full_unstemmed Relative Performance of Three Mesh-Reduction Methods in Predicting Mode III Crack-Tip Singularity
title_sort Relative Performance of Three Mesh-Reduction Methods in Predicting Mode III Crack-Tip Singularity
author Mukhtar,Faisal M.
author_facet Mukhtar,Faisal M.
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Mukhtar,Faisal M.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Mode III cracks
crack-tip singularity
radial basis function
boundary element method
method of fundamental solution
enriched formulation
topic Mode III cracks
crack-tip singularity
radial basis function
boundary element method
method of fundamental solution
enriched formulation
description Abstract Due to their robustness in handling the inherent singularity difficulties associated with crack analysis, mesh-reduction methods present an avalanche of formulations in the literature which, sometimes, entails modifications to their conventional/standard forms for better results. Although such formulations provide a pool of alternative choices to the analyst, increase in their number requires some relative assessment between them in order to guarantee optimum choice of analysis tool. The present study assesses the applicability and relative performance of three such mesh-reduction methods, namely the radial basis function (RBF) method, the boundary element method (BEM), and the method of fundamental solution (MFS) for mode III crack analysis. In order to have a common ground for performance comparison, these methods are, first, tested in their most basic forms and simplest conventional formulations possible. Failure of some of them to provide reliable results calls for some enrichments. Yet, unless where necessary, efforts are made to ensure that unnecessary computationally expensive formulations are avoided. Consequently, the BEM formulation is not altered in any way, and modifications to both the RBF and MFS are limited to enrichment by the addition of, at most, one singular term and/or the domain-decomposition technique. Verification is achieved using the literature results and/or those obtained by FEM in this study. Summary of the relative advantages and limitations of the methods for mode III crack analysis is given to serve as a yard-stick based on which the choice of one over the others may be influenced.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-08-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-78252017000701226
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-78252017000701226
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1679-78253656
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Ciências Mecânicas
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Ciências Mecânicas
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Latin American Journal of Solids and Structures v.14 n.7 2017
reponame:Latin American journal of solids and structures (Online)
instname:Associação Brasileira de Engenharia e Ciências Mecânicas (ABCM)
instacron:ABCM
instname_str Associação Brasileira de Engenharia e Ciências Mecânicas (ABCM)
instacron_str ABCM
institution ABCM
reponame_str Latin American journal of solids and structures (Online)
collection Latin American journal of solids and structures (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Latin American journal of solids and structures (Online) - Associação Brasileira de Engenharia e Ciências Mecânicas (ABCM)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv abcm@abcm.org.br||maralves@usp.br
_version_ 1754302889179742208