International Journal of Fracture

, Volume 199, Issue 2, pp 199–211 | Cite as

Enhanced fictitious crack model accounting for material drawn into the cohesive zone: physically based crack closure criterion

Original Paper


According to the fictitious crack model, the crack width is infinitely thin at crack initiation and with further loading the crack opens, but no material exists in the cohesive zone. Despite that, the crack is assumed to able to sustain a load. While this is possible at the atomic level, it is not a realistic assumption for the macroscopic behavior we are considering. Invoking the mass conservation law and by postulating a relation between the porosity f of the cohesive zone and the damage variable \(\kappa _{n}\), which is that part of the damage variable \((\kappa )\) that is related to opening of the crack, it is shown that the fictitious crack model can be enhanced so that it accounts for material that is drawn into the cohesive zone. In turn, the amount of material present in the cohesive zone implies a consistent and physically based crack closure criterion. The concepts are first discussed in detail for uniaxial loading and then generalized to arbitrary loadings.


Cohesive zone Mass conservation Crack closure 



Stimulating discussions with Adj. Prof. Johan Tryding, Lund University, Sweden and TetraPak, Lund, Sweden are greatly appreciated.


  1. Aslani F, Jowkarmeimandi R (2012) Stress–strain model for concrete under cyclic loading. Mag Concr Res 64(8):673–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barenblatt GI (1962) The mathematical theory of equilibrium cracks in brittle fracture. Adv Appl Mech 7:55–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Desai CK, Kumar AS, Basu S, Parameswaran V (2011) Measurement of cohesive parameters of crazes in polystyrene films. In: Proulx T (ed) Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on experimental and applied mechanics, vol 6. Springer, pp 519–526Google Scholar
  4. Dugdale DS (1960) Yielding of steel sheets containing slits. J Mech Phys Solids 8:100–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gopalaratnam VS, Shah SP (1985) Softening response of plain concrete in direct tension. ACI J 82(3):310–323Google Scholar
  6. Hassanzadeh M (1990) Determination of fracture zone properties in mixed mode I and II. Eng Fract Mech 35:845–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hillerborg A, Modéer M, Petersson P-E (1976) Analysis of crack formation and crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements. Cem Concr Res 6(6):773–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hordijk DA (1991) Local approach to fatigue of concrete. Doctoral thesis, Technische Universiteit Delft, Delft, The Netherlands, pp 210Google Scholar
  9. Kambour RP (1973) A review of crazing and fracture in thermoplastics. J Polym Sci Macromol Rev 7:1–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kramer EJ (1983) Microscopic and molecular fundamentals of crazing. Adv Polym Sci 52(53):1–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kramer EJ, Berger LL (1990) Fundamental processes of craze growth and fracture. Adv Polym Sci 91(92):1–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lauterwasser BD, Kramer EJ (1979) Microscopic mechanisms and mechanics of craze growth and fracture. Phil Mag A39(4):469–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Leuschner M, Fritzen F, van Dommelen JAW, Hoefnagels JPM (2015) Potential-based constitutive models for cohesive interfaces: theory, implementation and examples. Compos B 68:38–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Needleman A (2014) Some issues in cohesive surface modeling. Procedia IUTAM 10:221–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ottosen NS (1986) Thermodynamic consequences of strain softening in tension. J Eng Mech (ASCE) 112(11):1152–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ottosen NS, Ristinmaa M (2013) Thermodynamically based fictitious crack/interface model for general normal and shear loading. Int J Solids Struct 50:3555–3561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Reinhardt HW, Cornelissen HAW, Hordijk DA (1986) Tensile tests and failure analysis of concrete. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 112(11):2462–2477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sima JF, Roca P, Molins C (2008) Cyclic constitutive model for concrete. Eng Struct 30(3):695–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Yankelevsky DZ, Reinhardt HW (1989) Uniaxial behavior of concrete in cyclic tension. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 115(1):166–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Solid MechanicsLund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations