are used to model adhesives between two components, each of which may
be deformable or rigid;
are used to model interfacial debonding using a cohesive zone
framework;
are used to model gaskets and/or small adhesive patches;
can be connected to the adjacent components by sharing nodes, by using
mesh tie constraints, or by using MPCs type TIE or PIN; and
may interact with other components via contact for gasket
applications.
This section discusses the techniques that are available to discretize
cohesive zones and assemble them in a model representing several components
that are bonded to one another. It also discusses several common modeling
issues related to cohesive elements.
Discretizing Cohesive Zones Using Cohesive Elements
The cohesive zone must be discretized with a single layer of cohesive
elements through the thickness. If the cohesive zone represents an adhesive
material with a finite thickness, the continuum macroscopic properties of this
material can be used directly for modeling the constitutive response of the
cohesive zone. Alternatively, if the cohesive zone represents an
infinitesimally thin layer of adhesive at a bonded interface, it may be more
relevant to define the response of the interface directly in terms of the
traction at the interface versus the relative motion across the interface.
Finally, if the cohesive zone represents a small adhesive patch or a gasket
with no lateral constraint, a uniaxial stress state provides a good
approximation to the state of these elements.
Abaqus
provides modeling capabilities for all the above cases. The details are
discussed in later sections.
Connecting Cohesive Elements to Other Components
At least one of either the top or the bottom face of the cohesive element
must be constrained to another component. In most applications it is
appropriate to have both faces of the cohesive elements tied to neighboring
components. If only one face of the cohesive element is constrained and the
other face is free, the cohesive element exhibits one or (for three-dimensional
elements) more singular modes of deformation due to the lack of membrane
stiffness. The singular modes can propagate from one cohesive element to the
adjacent one but can be suppressed by constraining the nodes on the side face
at the end of a series of cohesive elements.
In some cases it may be convenient and appropriate to have cohesive elements
share nodes with the elements on the surfaces of the adjacent components. More
generally, when the mesh in the cohesive zone is not matched to the mesh of the
adjacent components, cohesive elements can be tied to other components. When
cohesive elements are used to model gaskets, it may be more appropriate to tie
or share nodes on one side and define contact on the other side as discussed
below. This will prevent the gaskets from being subjected to tensile stresses.
Having Cohesive Elements Share Nodes with Other Elements
When the cohesive elements and their neighboring parts have matched meshes,
it is straightforward to connect cohesive elements to other components in a
model simply by sharing nodes (see
Figure 1).
When these elements are used as adhesives or to model debonding, this method
can be used to obtain initial results from a model—more accurate local results
(in the decohesion zone) would typically be obtained with the cohesive zone
more refined than the elements of the surrounding components. When these
elements are used to model gaskets, this approach is suitable in situations
when no frictional slip occurs between the gaskets and the surrounding
components. The method of sharing nodes in gasket applications will lead to
tensile stresses in the gasket should the parts connected to the gasket be
pulled apart. Defining contact on one side of the cohesive elements will avoid
such tensile stresses.
Connecting Cohesive Elements to Other Components by Using Surface-Based Tie Constraints
If the two neighboring parts do not have matched meshes, such as when the
discretization level in the cohesive layer is different (typically finer) from
the discretization level in the surrounding structures, the top and/or bottom
surfaces of the cohesive layer can be tied to the surrounding structures using
a tie constraint (Mesh Tie Constraints).
Figure 2
shows an example in which a finer discretization is used for the cohesive layer
than for the neighboring parts.
Contact Interactions between Cohesive Elements and Other Components
For some applications involving gaskets it is appropriate to define contact
on one side of the cohesive element (see
Figure 3).
Contact can be defined with either the general contact algorithm in Abaqus/Explicit (About General Contact in Abaqus/Explicit) or the
contact pair algorithm in Abaqus/Standard (About Contact Pairs in Abaqus/Standard) or Abaqus/Explicit (About Contact Pairs in Abaqus/Explicit). If pure
main-secondary contact is used, typically the surface of the cohesive elements should be
the secondary surface and the surface of the neighboring part should be the main surface.
This choice of main and secondary is based on the cohesive zone typically being composed
of softer materials and having a finer discretization. The second consideration also
suggests that mismatched meshes will often be used in analyses involving cohesive
elements. If mismatched meshes are used, the pressure distribution on the cohesive
elements may not be predicted accurately; submodeling (About Submodeling) may be
required to obtain accurate local results.
Using Cohesive Elements in Large-Displacement Analyses
Cohesive elements can be used in large-displacement analyses. The assembly
containing the cohesive elements can undergo finite displacement as well as
finite rotation.
Selecting the Broad Class of the Constitutive Response of Cohesive Elements
Assigning a Material Behavior to a Cohesive Element
You assign the name of a material definition to a particular element set.
The constitutive behavior for this element set is defined entirely by the
constitutive thickness of the cohesive layer (discussed in
Specifying the Constitutive Thickness)
and the material properties referring to the same name.
The constitutive behavior of the cohesive elements can be defined either in
terms of a material model provided in
Abaqus
or a user-defined material model (see
User-Defined Mechanical Material Behavior).
When cohesive elements are used in applications involving a finite-thickness
adhesive, any available material model in
Abaqus,
including material models for progressive damage, can be used. For applications
involving gasket and/or small finite-thickness adhesive patches, any material
model that can be used with one-dimensional elements (such as beams, trusses,
and rebars), including material models for progressive damage, can be used. For
further details, see
Defining the Constitutive Response of Cohesive Elements Using a Continuum Approach.
For applications in which the behavior of cohesive elements is defined directly
in terms of traction versus separation, the response can be defined only in
terms of a linear elastic relation (between the traction and the separation)
along with progressive damage (see
Defining the Constitutive Response of Cohesive Elements Using a Traction-Separation Description).
To define the constitutive behavior of cohesive elements, you assign the
name of a material model to a particular element set through the section
definition. The actual material model for a user-defined material model is
defined in user subroutine
UMAT in
Abaqus/Standard
or
VUMAT in
Abaqus/Explicit.
Using Cohesive Elements in Coupled Pore Fluid Diffusion/Stress Analyses
Cohesive elements with, or without, pore pressure degrees of freedom can be
used in coupled pore fluid diffusion/stress analyses. Cohesive elements without
pore pressure degrees of freedom will only contribute mechanically, and
surfaces exposed when cohesive elements open will be impermeable to fluid flow.
Cohesive elements with pore pressure degrees of freedom provide a more
general response, including the ability to model tangential flow and leakage
flow from the gap into the adjacent material. These elements have additional
pore pressure nodes in the gap interior, and you can choose to define these
nodes explicitly or have them generated automatically by
Abaqus/Standard.
Cohesive elements are used to bond two different components. Often the
cohesive elements completely degrade in tension and/or shear as a result of the
deformation. Subsequently, the components that are initially bonded together by
cohesive elements may come into contact with each other. Several approaches are
available for modeling this kind of contact.
Allowing the Cohesive Element Fo Handle the Contact
In certain situations this kind of contact can be handled by the cohesive
element itself. By default, cohesive elements retain their resistance to
compression even if their resistance to other deformation modes is completely
degraded. As a result, the cohesive elements resist interpenetration of the
surrounding components even after the cohesive element has completely degraded
in tension and/or shear. This approach works best when the top and the bottom
faces of the cohesive element do not displace tangentially by a significant
amount relative to each other during the deformation. In other words, to model
the situation described above, the deformation of the cohesive elements should
be limited to “small sliding.”
Defining Contact and Deleting Cohesive Elements When They Are Completely Degraded
Another possible approach is to define contact between the surfaces of the
surrounding components that could potentially come into contact and to delete
the cohesive elements once they are completely damaged. Thus, contact is
modeled throughout the analysis. This approach is not recommended if the
geometric thickness of the cohesive elements in the model is very small or zero
(the geometric thickness of the cohesive elements may be different from the
constitutive thickness you specify while defining the section properties of the
cohesive elements—see
Specifying the Constitutive Thickness)
because contact will effectively cause nonphysical resistance to compression of
the cohesive layer while the cohesive elements are still active. If frictional
contact is modeled, there may also be nonphysical shearing forces.
This is the behavior that will occur by default with the general contact
algorithm in
Abaqus/Explicit.
Figure 4,
Figure 5,
and
Figure 6
show the default surface for general contact. This surface:
is insensitive to whether the cohesive elements and neighboring elements
share nodes, are tied together, or are not connected; and
does not include faces of cohesive elements.
Figure 7
shows the situation when the surfaces of the cohesive elements are also added
to the default surface.
Abaqus/Explicit
generates a contact exclusion automatically so that the general contact
algorithm avoids consideration of contact between the bottom surface of the
cohesive elements and the top surface of Part 2 since these surfaces are tied
together.
Activating Contact Only When the Cohesive Elements Are Completely Degraded and Deleted
For general contact in
Abaqus/Explicit,
yet another approach for modeling contact between the surrounding structures
involves activating contact only when the cohesive elements are completely
degraded and deleted from the model (see
Maximum Degradation and Choice of Element Removal).
For this approach the cohesive elements must share nodes with the neighboring
element and the general contact definition must include surfaces on the top and
bottom faces of the cohesive elements, as shown in
Figure 8.
Since each surface face of the cohesive elements directly opposes a surface
face of a neighboring element, the general contact algorithm does not consider
these faces active while both parent elements are active. However, if the
cohesive element fails, the opposing surface faces become active.
Using Cohesive Elements in Symmetric Models in Abaqus/Standard
Symmetry has long been exploited by engineers to simplify problem solving
and to reduce model sizes. This is also a common practice in finite element
analyses. The symmetry of structure and loading conditions allows you to model
only a portion (half, quarter, etc.) of the actual structure. When crack
propagation or delamination coincides with the plane of geometric symmetry, you
can arrange one layer of cohesive elements along the symmetry plane and model
half of the structure, as shown in
Figure 9.
You can choose any plane that is perpendicular to one of the global coordinate
axes as the symmetry plane. Symmetric deformation of the cohesive elements is
enforced automatically; you do not need to apply any symmetric constraints or
boundary conditions.
If cohesive elements with pore pressure degrees of freedom are used to model
tangential flow while concentrated fluid flow is used to define the fluid to be
injected into the middle plane of cohesive elements, you can specify the flow
magnitude as the same as the corresponding full model or half of the value.
Specifying half of the value of the flow magnitude is recommended if the
cohesive elements are connected to pipe elements.
Stable Time Increment in Abaqus/Explicit
The stable time increment for a cohesive element in
Abaqus/Explicit
is equal to the time, ,
required for a stress wave to travel across the constitutive thickness,
,
of the cohesive layer:
where
is the wave speed and
and
represent the bulk stiffness and the density, respectively, of the adhesive
material. In terms of the expression for the wave speed, the stable time
increment can be written as
For cases in which the constitutive response is defined in terms of traction
versus separation, the slope of the traction versus separation relationship is
and the density is specified as mass per unit area rather than per unit volume:
(see
Defining the Constitutive Response of Cohesive Elements Using a Traction-Separation Description
for further details on this issue). Therefore, for traction versus separation
the expression for the time increment becomes
It is quite common that the time increment of cohesive elements will be
significantly less than that of the other elements in the model, unless you
take some action to alter one or more of the factors influencing the time
increment. This requires some judgement on your part. The following discussions
provide some recommendations for controlling the time increment for the
different methods of defining the material response. However,
Abaqus/Standard
may be preferable in some applications where it is necessary to model a thin,
stiff cohesive layer without approximations.
Constitutive Response Defined in Terms of a Continuum or Uniaxial Stress-State Approach
For constitutive response defined in terms of a continuum or uniaxial
stress-state approach, the ratio of the stable time increment of the cohesive
elements to that of the other elements is given by
where the subscripts “c” and “e” stand for the cohesive elements and the
surrounding elements, respectively. The thickness of the cohesive layer is
often smaller than a characteristic length of the other elements in the model,
so the quantity
is often small. The quantity under the radical will depend on the materials
involved. For an epoxy adhesive between steel components, the quantity under
the radical is on the order of unity. The stable time increment of the cohesive
element can be increased by artificially
increasing the constitutive thickness, ;
increasing the density, ;
reducing the stiffness, ;
or
some combination of the above.
In many cases the most attractive option will be to increase the density,
which is also referred to as mass scaling (Mass Scaling).
However, if the thickness of the cohesive zone is very small, the mass scaling
required to achieve a reasonable time increment may affect the results
significantly. In such cases it may be necessary to artificially reduce the
cohesive stiffness in addition to some mass scaling. This approach involves the
use of a stiffness that is different from the measured stiffness of the
interface; however, if the peak strength and the fracture energy remain
unchanged, the global response will not be affected significantly in many
cases.
Constitutive Response Defined in Terms of Traction Versus Separation
For constitutive response defined in terms of traction versus separation,
the ratio of the stable time increment of the cohesive elements to that for the
other elements is given by
where the subscripts “c” and “e” stand for the cohesive elements and the
surrounding elements, respectively.
One way to ensure that the cohesive elements will have no adverse effect on
the stable time increment is to choose material properties such that
,
which implies
This is accomplished if, for example, the cohesive element stiffness and
density per unit area are chosen such that
where
represents the characteristic length of the neighboring non-cohesive elements.
By choosing ,
the stiffness in the cohesive layer relative to the surrounding elements will
be similar to the default stiffness used by penalty contact in
Abaqus/Explicit
(relative to the equivalent one-dimensional stiffness of the surrounding
elements). This approach involves the use of a stiffness that is likely to be
different from the measured stiffness of the interface; however, if the peak
strength and the fracture energy remain unchanged, the global response will not
be affected significantly in many cases.
Convergence Issues in Abaqus/Standard
In many problems cohesive elements are modeled as undergoing progressive
damage leading to failure. The modeling of progressive damage involves
softening in the material response, which is known to lead to convergence
difficulties in an implicit solution procedure, such as in
Abaqus/Standard.
Convergence difficulties may also occur during unstable crack propagation, when
the energy available is higher than the fracture toughness of the material.
Several methods are available to help avoid these convergence problems.
Another approach to help convergence behavior is the use of automatic
stabilization (see
Static Stress Analysis
and
Solving Nonlinear Problems
for further details), which is useful when a problem is unstable due to local
instabilities. Generally, if sufficient viscous regularization is used (as
measured by the viscosity coefficient—see
Viscous Regularization in Abaqus/Standard
for further details), the use of the automatic stabilization technique is not
necessary. In problems where a small amount or no viscous regularization is
used, automatic stabilization will improve the convergence characteristics.