4 tayangan

Diunggah oleh Nguyen Hoai Phuong

Extended finite element simulation of stationary dynamic cracks
in piezoelectric solids under impact loading

- BR1452513184IITH (FEM 2016 Invitation Brochure)
- Mechanical Engg 2014
- Daten Blatt
- cfd
- Aeroelasticity.pdf
- Dispensa Da Fare Matlab
- Review of Matrices and Vectors
- 00261
- Chapter 01 Higher Order Weight Functions in Fracture Mechanics of Multimaterials
- FTEE_77_70
- Lecture 1
- DifferenceEquations-p
- Structure Dynamics.docx
- Heidergots0_8120.pdf
- ICDERS2007-0112
- eigen
- WCECS2008_pp1166-1171_2
- r5.05.02
- [Carcione,_et_al.]_Seismic_modeling(BookZZ.org).pdf
- vinayak iyer pdf

Anda di halaman 1dari 15

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/commatsci

in piezoelectric solids under impact loading

Tinh Quoc Bui , Chuanzeng Zhang

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Siegen, Paul-Bonatz Str. 9-11, 57076 Siegen, Germany

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:

Received 30 April 2012

Received in revised form 18 May 2012

Accepted 20 May 2012

Keywords:

Piezoelectric materials

Dynamic fracture

Dynamic intensity factors

X-FEM

Enrichment techniques

a b s t r a c t

This work presents a transient dynamic analysis of stationary cracks in two-dimensional, homogeneous

and linear piezoelectric solids subjected to coupled electromechanical impact loads using the extended

nite element method (X-FEM). To serve this purpose, a dynamic X-FEM computer code using quadrilateral elements in conjunction with the level set method to accurately describe the crack geometry is

developed. The sixfold basis enrichment functions particularly suitable for cracks in piezoelectric materials are adopted to fully capture the singular elds at the crack-tips in piezoelectricity. The governing

equations are transformed into a weak-form and the time-dependent system of discrete equations is then

obtained, which is solved by the unconditionally implicit time integration method at each time-step. To

accurately assess the relevant dynamic mechanical stress and electric displacement intensity factors precisely and efciently, domain-form of the contour integration integral taking the inertial effect into

account in conjunction with the asymptotic near crack-tip elds of piezoelectric materials is presented.

Four numerical examples for stationary cracks in homogeneous piezoelectric solids with impermeable

crack-face boundary condition under impact loads are considered, respectively. Validation of the present

method is made by comparing the present results with reference solutions available in the literature, and

very good agreements are obtained. The effects of different poling directions and combined electromechanical impact loads are analyzed in details.

2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Piezoelectric materials have been widely used in many intelligent components and structures due to the coupling effects between the mechanical and electrical elds. Modeling and

simulation of the defects, e.g., cracks, in such piezoelectric structures and materials have been receiving more and more attentions

in the last few decades [1]. Assessing the relevant dynamic fracture

parameters of cracks in piezoelectric materials subjected to the

coupled electromechanical impact loads is essential, which may

gain valuable knowledge to enhance and improve the performance

of smart piezoelectric structures and devices in engineering

applications. As a consequence, the dynamic fracture analysis has

become one of the most important research areas, in which the

evaluation and characterization of the mechanical and electrical

reliability, integrity and durability in engineering applications is

of great importance. Study of such complex dynamic fracture

problems in piezoelectric materials often requires us to solve the

corresponding initial-boundary value problems. Because of the

limitations of the analytical solutions and the expensiveness of

Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 2717402836; fax: +49 2717404074.

E-mail addresses: bui-quoc@bauwesen.uni-siegen.de (T.Q. Bui), c.zhang@

uni-siegen.de (C. Zhang).

0927-0256/$ - see front matter 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2012.05.049

a key numerical tool to accomplish that purpose, and among them

the nite element method (FEM) [2] and the boundary element

method (BEM) [3] are the most popular techniques.

Most of the previous works dealing with fracture problems in

piezoelectric solids are based on the FEM and the BEM. The most

important task and also a key factor in such a work is to evaluate

the relevant eld intensity factors efciently and accurately, thus

the singularity of the mechanical and electrical elds at the

crack-tips must be described somehow in the formulations. Kuna

and his co-workers [412] have developed special singular cracktip elements in the FEM to accurately model many crack problems

in piezoelectric materials under static and dynamic loading conditions. Pan [13] has presented a single-domain boundary element

model using the complex variable function method to analyze

the fracture parameters in two-dimensional (2D) anisotropic piezoelectric materials. Rajapakse and Xu [14] has applied the BEM

to linear fracture problems in 2D piezoelectric solids using the extended Lekhnitskiis formalism and distributed dislocation model.

Garcia-Sancherz et al. [15,16] proposed a time-domain BEM

(TDBEM) using a combination of the strongly singular displacement boundary integral equations and the hypersingular traction

boundary integral equations to transient dynamic analysis in

nite and innite cracked piezoelectric solids, and a time-domain

244

Wnsche et al. [17]. The works presented in [18,19] represent in

essence the so-called mesh-free methods (i.e. no mesh or elements

are required), Liew et al. [18] has applied a traction boundary integral equation method using integration by parts and the moving

least-squares approximation while Liu et al. [19] has extended

the approximated spaces by embedding the known enrichment

functions to study crack and interface discontinuities in piezoelectric solids. Other works in the framework of the meshless methods

can also be found, e.g., [2022], and so on.

Recently, the extended nite element method (X-FEM) pioneered by Belytschko and his co-workers [23,24] in terms of the

partition of unity [25] has gained considerable attention in the eld

of computational methods in engineering applications and material sciences. A broad range of problems dealt by this approach

has been increasingly expanded in the last decades. Remarkable

agreements of the previous studies have successfully illustrated

the high applicability and the effectiveness of the method in solving boundary value problems on domains with discontinuities.

However, the application of the X-FEM to study fracture problems

in piezoelectric materials and structures is rather rare. In 2009,

Bchet et al. [26] have introduced a new set of sixfold basis enrichment functions into the X-FEM to investigate the semi-innite

crack and GriffthIrwin crack in 2D piezoelectric materials with

an arbitrary polarization direction. This new set of enrichment

functions is derived from Lekhnitskiis formalism and Whlliams

eigenfunction expansion approach. They have found that the standard fourfold enrichment functions for isotropic materials [23,24]

can be applied to crack problems in piezoelectric materials with

no signicant difference in the results compared with that using

their own sixfold basis enrichment functions. This may be coherent

with the weak coupling effect among the elastic and electric elds.

Obviously, this nding is in fact useful since the much simpler

fourfold basis could be used for some complex practical problems

with less implementation efforts. Recently, Bhargava and Sharma

have performed a static study of nite size effects in cracked 2D

piezoelectric media using the standard fourfold basis [27]. More recently, they have presented a new set of six enrichment functions

that is also based on Lekhnitskiis formalism with a slightly different sense to analyze two-unequal-collinear cracks [28]. Another

novel application of the X-FEM to fracture problems in multiphase

magnetoelectroelastic composite materials has presented in [29].

In all the aforementioned works on the X-FEM for crack analysis

in piezoelectric materials, only static loading is considered. In the

contrary, numerical simulations of the dynamic fracture problems

remain a challenging task, and dynamic loads are frequently present in many practical engineering problems. As a result, the motivation of tackling this dynamic task is due to the fact that the

inertia forces in case of the dynamic loads can cause higher stresses

and electric displacements in the vicinity of a crack-tip than the

static ones. To the best knowledge of the authors, none of any transient dynamic studies in cracked piezoelectric solids subjected to

impact loadings using the X-FEM can be found in the literature until the present work is being reported.

In this work we present a numerical analysis of stationary dynamic cracks in transversely isotropic piezoelectric solids using

the X-FEM with the sixfold basis enrichment functions. The effects

of the polarization directions, mesh sizes, time-steps, combined

dynamic electromechanical impact loads, and intensity of the electric impact loading, etc. on the dynamic intensity factors are analyzed. In order to calculate the relevant dynamic intensity factors

efciently, an interaction integral derived from the domain-form

of the path-independent electromechanical J-integral taking the

inertial effect into account is presented. Standard implicit time

integration scheme is employed for solving the time-dependent

system of discrete equations. Numerical examples are given and

and discussed in details.

The paper is organized as follows. After the introduction, problem statement and asymptotic crack-tip elds in piezoelectric

materials are briey reported. The X-FEM formulation particularly

developed for stationary dynamic crack problems in piezoelectric

solids is presented in Section 3. Section 4 describes the interaction

integral and the computation of the generalized dynamic intensity

factors in piezoelectric materials. The key steps of the numerical

solution procedure are given in the next section. In Section 6, four

numerical examples are presented and discussed in details. Finally,

the essential conclusions drawn from the present study are given

in the last section.

2.1. Problem statement

Let us consider a 2D homogeneous and linear piezoelectric solid

C [ CC occupied by a do2

main X R bounded by its boundary C with an outward unit

normal vector with the components ni. The boundary C is subjected, respectively, to the essential boundary conditions prescribed by the displacements on Cu or the electric potential on

Cu, and to the natural boundary conditions imposed by the tractions on Cr or the electric displacements on CD, so that

Cu [ Cr = C or CD [ Cu = C. Under the quasi-electrostatic

assumption and in the presence of body forces fmech and electric

body charges felec, the equations of motion for the stresses and

the Gauss law for the electric displacements can be written as

where q is the mass density, and i denotes the second time derivative of the displacements or the acceleration, while rij and Di represent the mechanical stress tensor and the electric displacement

vector, respectively.

The generalized constitutive equations for homogeneous and

linear piezoelectric materials are [1,4]

where Cijkl and jil represent the elastic stiffness tensor and the

dielectric permittivities, whereas elij and hlij are the piezoelectric

and piezomagnetic coupling coefcients, respectively. The kinematic relations among the mechanical strain tensor eij and the

mechanical displacement vector ui as well as the electric eld vector

Ei and the scalar electric potential u, are given by

1

2

eld variables comprising ui and u are yet to be determined and

they must satisfy the essential boundary conditions on the boundaries Cu and Cu as

j on Cu ;

uj u

on Cu

uu

and on the boundaries Cr and CD, the mechanical stresses and the

electric displacements must satisfy the natural boundary conditions

as

rij nj tmech

on Cr ; Dj nj t elec on CD

j

Here, the terms with over-bar stand for the prescribed values.

Throughout the study, the crack-faces CC are assumed to be traction-free and electrically impermeable, i.e.

rij nj 0; Dj nj 0 on CC

245

_ i 0

u_ i t 0 u

i 0;

ui t 0 u

i and u

_ being the initial displacements and velocities,

with u

respectively.

2.2. Asymptotic crack-tip elds in linear piezoelectric materials

~ with the

Following [30,412] and using polar coordinates r; h

origin at the crack-tip, the mechanical stress and electrical displacement elds for cracks in homogeneous piezoelectric media

can be expressed as

rij r; ~h p

2pr

X

K N fijN ~h;

N

1 X

Di r; ~h p

K N g Ni ~h

2pr N

and the near tip displacement eld and electric potential can be given by

ui r; ~h

r

2r X

N

K N di ~h;

ur; ~h

r

2rX

K N v N ~h

the fracture modes as denoted by KN = {KII, KI, KIII, KIV}T, but KIII is

omitted for the 2D case. The standard angular functions fijN ~

h,

N

g Ni ~

h; di ~

h and v N ~

h depending on the material properties are

determined by means of the generalized Strohs formalism and

semi-analytical calculations. Finally, they can be expressed in terms

of complex material eigenvalues p-, eigenvectors AM- and matrices

N-N and MM- as

8

8

9

9

>

>

>

>

4

< M N p

<

=

=

X

Mi- N-N

i- -N ; fi2N

fi1N Re q

Re q

>

>

>

>

-1 : cos ~

-1 : cos ~

h p- sin ~h;

h p- sin ~h;

8

8

9

9

>

>

>

>

4

4

< M N p

<

=

=

X

X

M

N

4- -N 4- -N

; g N2

Re q

g N1 Re q

>

>

>

>

-1 : cos ~

-1 : cos ~

h p sin ~h;

h p sin ~h;

4

X

4

X

-1

vN

4

X

q

Re Ai- N-N cos ~h p- sin ~h ;

q

Re A4- N-N cos ~h p- sin ~h

11

-1

where Re{} denotes the real part of the quantity in brackets. The

four conjugate pairs of the eigenvalues p- and eigenvectors AMcan be derived by solving the following characteristic eigenvalue

equation

Ai

C i1k1 ei11

C i2k1 C i1k2 ei21 ei12

C i2k2 ei22

p

p2

0

e1k1 j11

e2k1 e1k2 j12 j21

e2k2 j22

A4

12

Only the four eigenvalues having positive imaginary part and the

corresponding eigenvectors are used in Eqs. (10) and (11). The

(4 4) matrices N-N and MM- are determined by

MM- N1

-N

The essential idea of the X-FEM is to use a displacement approximation that is able to model arbitrary discontinuities and the near

crack-tip asymptotic elds using the concept of partition of unity

[25]. The standard local displacement approximation around the

crack is enriched with discontinuous jump function across the

crack-faces and the asymptotic crack-tip elds around the cracktip. When the problem domain is discretized by nite elements

with Ns being the nodal set, the extended nite element approximation for the mechanical displacements and electric potential

can be written explicitly as

uh x

u x

e i xui

N

i2Ns

j2N

e i xu

N

i

i2N s

N

cut

l2N

N

j2Ncut

e l x

N

tip

6 h

i

X

k

re

im

re

im

F k r; ~h; lk ; lk

F k xl ; lk ; lk

bl

k1

6 h

i

X

k

re

im

re

im

e l x

F k r; ~h; lk ; lk

N

F k x l ; lk ; lk

dl

l2N tip

k1

14

10

di

element mesh is independent of the crack and the mesh does not

require to be conformed to the crack-faces, which avoids re-meshing in crack propagation modeling. Associated with the level set

technique, the crack in 2D case is essentially described by two normal and tangent level set functions. The normal level set function

is dened as a signed distance function to the union of the crack

and the tangent extension from its front, whereas the tangent level

set function is also a signed distance function but to the surface

that passes by the crack boundary and normal to the crack. Thus,

the crack-faces are determined as the subset of the zero normal level set, where the tangent function is negative, while the crack-tip

is dened as the intersection of the two zero level sets.

The enriched nite element approximations, the weak-form and

the discrete system of algebraic equations, the enrichment functions particularly used for piezoelectric materials, and the implicit

time integration scheme within the framework of the X-FEM are

presented consistently in the following.

13

The X-FEM model associated with the level set method used for

description of the crack geometry [31,32] and the implicit time

integration scheme is an efcient numerical tool for solving dynamic crack problems in piezoelectric materials due to its versatile

where x = (x, y) in 2D, f(x) represents an implicit function description, i.e. a level set, and Ncut and Ntip denote the sets of the enriched

nodes associated with crack-faces and of the enriched nodes associated with the crack-tips, respectively, with Ncut \ Ntip = as dee i x represents the shape functions

picted in Fig. 1. Also, N

associated with the node i that construct the partition of unity, ui

and ui are the vectors of the nodal degrees of freedom (DOFs) containing the nodal displacements and electric potentials dened in

k

k

the conventional nite elements, while ai ; bi and ci ; di are the enriched DOFs in the elements containing the crack, H(f(x)) is the generalized Heaviside step function enabling the modeling of a crack

that fully cuts a nite element, i.e.,

Hf

if f > 0

1 otherwise

15

re

im

are the asymptotic crack-tip enrichment

and F k r; ~

h; lk ; lk

functions given by Bchet et al. [26]

pn

re

im

F k r; ~h; lk ; lk

r g 1 ~h; g 2 ~h; g 3 ~h; g 4 ~h; g 5 ~h; g 6 ~h

16

with r; ~

h being the polar coordinate system at the crack-tip, where

r denes the amplitude from the crack-tip to an arbitrary point

re

im

around the crack-tip, i.e. r = kx xtipk, while lk and lk are the

real and imaginary parts of a complex number lk, respectively.

To allow for arbitrary poling directions as depicted in Fig. 2, it is

controlled by assigning x ~

h h, with h being the orientation of

the material axes with respect to the crack. The functions g m ~

h

in Eq. (16) are determined by

246

m

1

p

2

4

re

jlm j2 lm sin2x jlm j2 1 cos2x

19

When introducing the weighting quantities du (virtual displacements) and du (virtual electric potential) by using the principle of

virtual work, time-dependent discrete equations of the X-FEM for

the coupled electromechanical initial-boundary value problems

as presented in Section 2 are generated from the following weakform

Z

deT rdX dET DdX

X

X

X

Z

Z

Z

T mech

T elec

du f

dX du f dX

duTtmech dC

X

X

Cr

Z

duTtelec dC

Fig. 1. Selection of the enriched nodes for 2D crack problems in a nite element

mesh. Blank circled nodes stored in the set of nodes Ncut are enriched by the

discontinuity function, whereas the blank squared nodes stored in the set of nodes

Ntip are enriched by the asymptotic crack-tip functions.

qduT u dX

20

CD

into the weak-form Eq. (20) involving arbitrary virtual displacements and electric potential and after some appropriate manipulations, a system of discretized piezoelectric nite element equations

without damping effect can be derived in compact form as

kuu u kuu u f

muu u

kuu u kuu u f

mech

Kd F

or Md

elec

21

where M, K and d are the global mass and stiffness matrices and the

global nodal displacement vector of the system. For the enriched

elements, the elementary consistent mass and stiffness matrices

(superscript e) are obtained as

mUU

ij

6 aU

meij 6

4 mij

mbU

ij

mUb

ij

mUij a

7

mijab 7

5;

maa

ij

mbija

mbb

ij

UU

kij

6

6

e

kij 6 kijaU

4

bU

kij

Ua

kij

aa

kij

ba

kij

Ub

kij

7

ab 7

kij 7

5

bb

kij

22

meij mUU

ij ;

UU

kij kij

23

Fig. 2. Notation of the material axes at the crack-tip and the polarization direction.

8

re im

wm x~h;h;lm ;lm

>

re

im

im

>

~

>

if lm > 0

< qm xh;h; lm ; lm cos

2

~

g m h

re im

>

wm x~h;h;lm ;lm

re

im

im

>

>

if lm 6 0

: qm x~h;h; lm ; lm sin

2

17

p

The complex numbers lm l il

with i 1 being the

imaginary unit, are the six roots of the characteristic equation

(see Appendix A) whose imaginary parts are positive. The modied

re

im

angle

wm x~

h; h; lm ; lm

and

the

modied

radius

re

im

qm x~h; h; lm ; lm are determined, respectively, by

re

m

im

m ,

p

x

re

wm x~h; h; lm

; lim

pint

m

2

p

0

1

x

x

re

cos

x

p

int

l

sin

x

p

int

B

p C

p m

arctan @

A

im

lm
sin x pint x

p

18

In Eq. (21), F represents the vector of the external nodal forces, and

the element contribution to the global element force vector is given

by

n

oT

e

U a b

fi fi fi fi

24

e

fi fi

25

In

the

above

equations,

we

have

denoted

by

k

k

U fu /gT ; a fai ci gT ; b fbi di gT and their detailed components as

mUU

ij

Z

Xe

eTN

e j dX;

qN

i

26

maa

ij

mbb

ij

mUij a

e i Hi T N

e j Hj dX;

q N

Xe

e i F k T N

e j F k dX;

q N

i

j

aU

mij

bU

mUb

ij mij

mijab mbija

rs

kij

U

fi

a

fi

b

fi

Z

Z

Xe

@ Xe

@ Xe

Z

Z

Xe

Xe

Xe

e i T N

e j F k dX;

q N

j

e i Hi T N

e j F k dX

q N

j

e itdC

N

Z

Xe

27

e ifdX

N

Z

Xe

e i Hf h x Hfi fdX 29

N

h

i

e i F k r; ~h; lre ; lim F k xi ; lre ; lim tdC

N

m

m

m

m

h

i

e i F k r; ~h; lre ; lim F k xi ; lre ; lim fdX

N

m

m

m

m

30

Here, f and t represent the prescribed extended forces per unit volume and the prescribed extended tractions containing (fmech, felec)

and tmech ; telec , respectively. The matrices of the derivatives of

the shape functions BUi and Bai are dened explicitly by

e

S i;x

6

6 0

6

6

s

e

Bi 6

6 S i;y

6

6 0

4

0

0

e

S i;y

e

S i;x

0

0

7

0 7

7

7

0 7

7;

7

e

S i;x 7

5

e

S i;y

s U; a

31

in which each

(31) but e

SN F

mented instead.

d_ tDt

36

factors

In this study we use the domain-form of the contour interaction

integral to accurately calculate the generalized dynamic intensity

factors in the piezoelectric materials by taking the inertial effect

into account. The amplitudes of the dynamic fracture parameters

are characterized by the mechanical stress intensity factors (DSIFs)

KII, KI and the electrical displacement intensity factor (DEDIF) KIV.

The interaction integral method is an effective tool for calculating

such generalized intensity factors in homogeneous piezoelectric

materials as shown in [30], and we thus extend the method to

our dynamic crack problems. To this end, we apply the path-independent electromechanical J-integral for a cracked homogeneous

piezoelectric body [5,10,12]

S is different for BUi and Bai . For

s

U

e

e

e

instance, S N when Bi Bi , and e

S NHf

x Hf xi when

s

a

Bi Bi , while the matrix of the derivatives of shape function Bbi is

slightly different from those, which comprises of six components given by

b

Bi khhas

e k

35

28

e i Hf h x Hfi tdC

N

~

dtDt dt Dt d_ t 1 2b

In each time-step of the analysis, the values of the displacements, velocities and accelerations are obtained based on the corresponding known values from the previous time-step. This

approach is an implicit direct integration scheme and the choice

~ P 0:25c

~ P 0:5 and b

~ 0:52 guarantees the unconditional

of c

stability with second-order accuracy. In all the numerical examples

given in the following sections, the time-step Dt is set consistently

so that acceptable solutions can be achieved.

e i T N

e j Hj dX;

q N

@ Xe

Dt 2

tDt

~ Dt 2 d

dt b

2

t c

tDt

~Dt d

~ Dt d

d_ t 1 c

247

32

U

a

form

as the

matrices Bi

and

i Bi in Eq.

im

re

im

k

F xi ; m ; m

is implem

the same

re

r; ~

h; lm ; l

Z

@ui

@u

nj dC

Wd1j rij

Dj

@x1

@x1

C

d1j is the Kronecker delta while nj is the jth component of the outward unit vector normal to an arbitrary contour C enclosing the

crack-tip, and W = (rijeij DjEj)/2 is the electric enthalpy density

for a linear piezoelectric material. It is noted that Eq. (37) is valid

only for a crack lying in x1-direction.

In order to evaluate J in the nite element analysis, the contour

integral in Eq. (37) is then transformed into an equivalent domainform by applying the divergence theorem associated with an arbi~. Additionally, the equations of motrary smooth weight function q

tion and the compatibility equations as well as the assumption of

the traction-free boundary conditions on the crack-faces are also

taken into account, and after some mathematical manipulations

we nally arrive at

Z "

A

method has been widely used in structural dynamics analysis

and it is also adopted in this study to solve the discrete dynamic

equilibrium equations of the X-FEM at time t + Dt. Eq. (21) is thus

rewritten as follows [2]

Md

tDt KdtDt FtDt

33

are given by

2

t

tDt FtDt K dt Dt d_ t 1 2b

~Dt 2 Kd

~ Dt d

M b

2

34

tDt is determined by Eq. (34), the corresponding vecvector. Once d

tors of the displacements dt+Dt and the velocities d_ tDt at the time

t + Dt can then be evaluated by using

37

#

~

@ui

@u

@q

@ 2 ui @ui

~

q dA

rij

Dj

Wd1j

q 2

@xj

@x1

@x1

@t @x1

38

~ is an arbitrary smooth weighting function, which

crack-tip, while q

has a value of unity at the crack-tip, zero along the boundary of the

domainA, and a smooth linear variation in-between.

Let us now consider two independent dynamic equilibrium

states of the cracked body. The rst state corresponds to the actual

state under study, whereas the second one corresponds to an auxiliary state, which may be selected as the asymptotic crack-tip

elds of any fracture modes. Superposition of these two states

leads to another dynamic equilibrium state for which the domain-form of the J-integral is given by

J J 1 J2 M 1;2

(1)

(2)

39

actual (1) and the auxiliary (2) states, respectively, and

248

1;2

2

1 @ui

ij

@x1

r

A

1

2

1

2 @ui

1 @

2 @

Dj

Dj

W 1;2 d1j

ij

@x1

@x1

@x1

@ 2 ui @ui

@t2 @x1

(a)

~

@q

dA

@xj

!

~dA

q

40

W 1;2

1 1 2

1

1 2

2 1

rij eij r2

ij eij Dj Ej Dj Ej

2

41

According to [27], the electromechanical J-integral for linear piezoelectric materials under mixed-mode loading conditions can be

written as

1 T

K Y NM K M

2 N

42

and YNM is the (4 4) generalized Irwin matrix, which depends only

on the material properties and determined by

Y NM ImfAM- N-N g

43

with Im{} being the imaginary part of the quantity in brackets, and

AM- and N-N are determined by Eqs. (12) and (13) as presented in

Subsection 2.2. From Eq. (42), the J-integral can be applied to any

dynamic equilibrium state and in 2D problems it can be reduced to

(b)

1 2

1

1

K Y 11 K 2I Y 22 K 2IV Y 44 K I K II Y 12 K II K IV Y 14

2 II

2

2

K I K IV Y 24

0.04

44

0.03

Applying Eq. (44) to the two states (1) and (2) as J and J and

substituting them into Eq. (39), then the interaction integral M(1,2)

can be rewritten as

0.02

(1)

(2)

M 1;2 K II K II Y 11 K I K I Y 22 K IV K IV Y 44 K I K II

1 2

1 2

1 2

K II K I Y 12 K II K IV K IV K II Y 14

1 2

1 2

K I K IV K IV K I Y 24

0.01

45

0.01

they are done by judiciously choosing the auxiliary state appropriately. For instance, if the auxiliary state is taken for the crack open2

2

2

ing mode, i.e. K I 1; K II K IV 0, then I(1,I) yields

1

M 1;I K I Y 22 K II Y 12 K IV Y 24

0.02

46

0.03

1

0.04

M 1;II K I Y 12 K II Y 11 K IV Y 14

1

47

M 1;IV K I Y 24 K II Y 14 K IV Y 44

0.03

0.04

1

1

K

B II1 C

B 1;I C

B

@M

A Y@ K I C

A

1;IV

1

M

K IV

M 1;II

0.02

Fig. 3. A rectangular piezoelectric plate with a central crack under impact loading

(a); a regular ne mesh of 5000 quadrilateral elements (b).

simultaneously solving the following system of linear algebraic

equations

0.01

Only the key steps of the numerical solution procedure of the XFEM model for the stationary dynamic crack problems in 2D homogeneous piezoelectric solids are outlined as follows:

48

Table 1

Material properties with units: Cij (MPa), eij (C/m2), jij (C/GV m) and q (kg/m3).

PZT-5H

BaTiO3

C11

C22

C66

C12

e21

e22

e16

j11

j22

126.0

150.0

117.0

146.0

23.0

44.0

84.1

66.0

6.50

4.35

23.3

17.5

17.0

11.4

15.04

9.87

13.0

11.2

7500

5800

249

(a)

2.5

(a)

TDBEM

Present XFEM

TDBEM

Present XFEM

1.5

=0

1

1.5

0.5

D0=+1.0

KI

K*

D0=1.0

D =1.0

D =+1.0

0.5

0.5

1

0

1.5

0.5

t cL/h

(b)

0.2

(b)

TDBEM

Present XFEM

Poling direction: =0

0.15

t c /h

=0

1.5

0.1

0.5

IV

D0=+1.0

K*

KIV

0.05

TDBEM

Present XFEM

0

D0=1.0

0.05

0.5

0.1

0.15

0.2

0

1.5

t c /h

(1) Dene the problem domain containing cracks and input data

dening the specimen, material constants, and loadings.

(2) Discretize the problem domain into a set of elements, in

which the node coordinates and the element connectivity

are thus dened.

(3) Dene the normal and tangent level sets through the crack

geometries. Based on the dened normal and tangent level

sets, the enrichment nodes and enrichment elements are

detected and identied. The non-enrichment elements and

nodes are also marked.

(4) Specify the nodal information for the essential boundary

conditions and loadings.

(5) Dene the poling direction and compute the matrix of the

material constants through the specied poling angles.

(6) Solve the characteristic eigenvalue equations as dened in Eq.

(12) to determine the four conjugate pairs of the eigenvalues

p- and eigenvectors AM-, and then obtain the matrices N-N

and MM-.

(7) Loop over the elements

a. Loop over the quadrature dened based on the basis

of elements.

b. Condition 1: non-enriched elements.

Compute the mass matrix accordingly as dened in

Eqs. (23) and (26)

Compute the stiffness matrix accordingly as

dened in Eqs. (23) and (27)

Compute the force vector as dened in Eqs. (25) and

(28)

t cL/h

Fig. 4. Normalized dynamic stress intensity factor (a) and normalized dynamic electrical

displacement intensity factor (b) versus dimensionless time for a pure mechanical impact.

Fig. 5. Normalized dynamic stress intensity factor (a) and normalized dynamic

electrical displacement intensity factor (b) versus dimensionless time for a pure

electrical impact.

Compute the mass matrix accordingly as dened in Eqs.

(22) and (26)

Compute the stiffness matrix accordingly as dened in

Eqs. (22) and (27)

Compute the force vector as dened in Eqs. (24) and (28),

(29), (30)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

(13)

load vector into the global static stiffness matrix, global mass matrix, and force vector.

e. End the loop over the quadrature.

f. End the loop over the elements.

Imposing the boundary conditions.

Solve the system of linear algebraic equations to obtain the

nodal mechanical displacements, electric potentials, and

evaluate the mechanical strains, stresses, electric elds and

electric displacements if necessary.

Specify the integration parameters of Newmark algorithm,

~ in Subsection 3.3.

~; b

i.e. c

Calculate some other integration constants of time integration scheme.

Form the effective stiffness matrix based on Newmark

algorithm.

Specify the initial conditions for displacement, velocity and

acceleration vectors.

250

(a)

1.5

(a)

TDBEM

FEM (ANSYS)

Present XFEM

1.4

1.3

3.5

=0.25

2.5

=1.0

=0.5

TDBEM

Present XFEM

=0.0

=0.25

1.1

1.5

KI

*

I

1.2

=1.0

=0.5

=1.0

0.9

=0.5

0.5

=0.25

0.8

=0.0

0.7

Poling direction: =0

0.6

0

=0.25

0.5

=0.5

t cL/h

(b)

0.9

(b)

Poling direction: =0

0.8

Poling direction: =0

=0.5

0.6

0.4

=0.25

0.2

=0.0

K*

IV

1.05

1.1

0.2

=0.25

0.4

=0.5

0.6

=1.0

1.15

TDBEM

Present XFEM

0.8

TDBEM

FEM (ANSYS)

Present XFEM

1.2

1.25

0.95

*

IV

t c /h

=1.0

1

1.2

5

6. Numerical examples

Four benchmark numerical examples for stationary dynamic

cracks in piezoelectric solids are presented in the following to illustrate the accuracy of the developed X-FEM. The accuracy is numerically conrmed through the comparison of the normalized

dynamic intensity factors (NDIFs) obtained by the X-FEM with

those available in the literature. The impact loadings including

the mechanical, the electrical and their combination are considered throughout the study. Numerical calculations in the following

are carried out for two different piezoelectric materials, whose

constants are given in Table 1 [1517]. Plane-strain condition

and the impermeable crack-face boundary condition are assumed,

as well as the piezoelectric material PZT-5H is used throughout the

study unless stated otherwise. In addition, only regular ne

TDGBEM

Present XFEM

3

0

=90

2.5

=600

0

=30

=00

a. Calculate the effective load vector based on Newmark

algorithm.

b. Solve for the nodal mechanical displacement vector and

electric potential at each time-step.

c. Compute the J-integral and then determine the relevant

dynamic intensity factors including the mechanical stress

intensity factors KII, KI and the electrical displacement intensity factor KIV.

(15) Visualization and post-processing of the numerical results.

Fig. 7. Normalized dynamic stress intensity factor (a) and normalized dynamic

electrical displacement intensity factor (b) versus dimensionless time for different

loading parameter k.

K*

Fig. 6. Comparison of the normalized dynamic stress intensity factor (a) and the

normalized dynamic electrical displacement intensity factor (b) versus dimensionless time for a coupled electromechanical impact among the X-FEM, the FEM and

the BEM.

t cL/h

t cL/h

1.5

1

0.5

0

0

t cL/h

Fig. 8. Comparison of the normalized dynamic mode-I stress intensity factor versus

dimensionless time for different ration angles h obtained by the TDGBEM [17] and

the X-FEM.

of the solutions. For numerical integration of the weak form, we

merely adopt the sub-division technique [23,24] for conduct this

task throughout the study. The implicit Newmark time integration

is unconditionally stable but a sufciently small time-step is used

251

0.8

0.6

The specimen contains a central crack of length 2a in a homogeneous and linear piezoelectric plate as depicted in Fig. 3a with

h = 40.0 mm and a = 2.4 mm. Three different loadings are considered in the study include (a) an impact tensile mechanical loading

r (t) = r22 = r0H(t), (b) an impact electrical loading D(t) =

D2 = D0H(t), or (c) a combination of both impact mechanical and

electrical loadings, where r0 and D0 are the loading amplitudes

while H(t) denoting the Heaviside step function. The problem is

solved by using a regular ne mesh of 50 100 = 5000 quadrilateral elements as depicted in Fig. 3b.

=00

0.4

=300

0

0.2

=60

K*

II

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0

=90

0.8

1

TDGBEM

Present XFEM

t cL/h

Fig. 9. Comparison of the normalized dynamic mode-II stress intensity factor

versus dimensionless time for different ration angles h obtained by the TDGBEM

[17] and the X-FEM.

K*

IV

0.4

0

0.6

K I

KI

;

K st

I

K II

K II

e22 K IV

and K IV

j22 K stI

K st

I

49

p

with K st

I r0 pa and a denotes the half-length of the crack. The

numerical results for the normalized dynamic intensity factors

(NDIFs) against the dimensionless time t = tcL/h are presented in

q

Fig. 4, with cL C 22 e222 =j22 =q being the velocity of the longitudinal wave along the second principal material axis. In our time

integration algorithm, a very small time-step Dt = 1.02 106 s is

used for instance. Fig. 4 presents a comparison of the X-FEM results

for the normalized dynamic factors K I and K IV with those obtained

by the time-domain boundary element method (TDBEM) [15]. The

X-FEM results match well with the TDBEM solutions, and most

importantly it can be conrmed here that a pure mechanical impact

causes an electrical eld in the considered piezoelectric solids.

TDGBEM

Present XFEM

=900

0.2

We rst consider the plate subjected to an impact mechanical

loading as the case (a) (i.e. k = 0.0). In this case, the dynamic intensity factors are normalized by

=60

0.8

0

=30

1

0

=0

1.2

0

The plate in this case is now subjected to an impact electrical

loading as the case (b). The dynamic intensity factors are normalized by

t c /h

L

intensity factor versus dimensionless time for different ration angles h obtained by

the TDGBEM [17] and the X-FEM.

accuracy of the solutions.

K I

j22 K I

e22 K st

IV

and K IV

K IV

K st

IV

50

p

where K st

IV D0 pa. The computed results for the NDIFs are presented in Fig. 5 in comparison with the TDBEM solutions [15],

which shows very good agreement with each other. Here, two

important points arising from the numerical results can be observed. First, the amplitude of the NDIFs is the same when changing

Fig. 11. Scattered elastic waves at four different normalized time-steps t for the poling angle h = 0.

252

Fig. 12. Scattered elastic waves at four different normalized time-steps t for the poling angle h = 30.

amplitude D0, and the only change is their sign. Second, the essential difference observed from the numerical results of mechanical

and electrical impact loadings is the tendency when the normalized

time t ? 0. The NDIFs tend to zero as t ? 0 for a pure mechanical

impact loading (see Fig. 4), whereas they tend to nite values when

t ? 0 for a pure electrical impact (see Fig. 5). Additionally, the K I

factor is negative in some small time ranges, which happens in

the behavior of the K IV factor in the case of an impact mechanical

loading. Once again and most importantly, it is worth noting that

a pure electrical impact also induces a dynamic stress intensity

factor.

the dynamic fracture parameters. We here consider the same

example but now the plate is subjected simultaneously to a combined mechanical and electrical impact load as the case (c) above.

However, the following loading parameter is additionally dened

to measure the intensity of the electrical impact

e22 D0

51

j22 r0

(a)

TDBEM

Present XFEM

=0.0

2.5

=0.25

As well-known that the most important and interesting issue in

studying the fracture behavior of piezoelectric materials is the

2

=0.5

K*

1.5

=1.0

0.5

0

0

t c /h

L

(b)

0.4

0.2

=0.0

K*

IV

0

0.2

=0.25

0.4

=0.5

0.6

0.8

=1.0

1

1.2

TDBEM

Present XFEM

t c /h

L

Fig. 13. An edge crack in a nite piezoelectric plate subjected to an impact load.

Fig. 14. Normalized dynamic stress intensity factor (a) and normalized dynamic

electrical displacement intensity factor (b) versus dimensionless time for different

loading parameter k.

253

(a)

(a)

TDBEM

50100

3070

2040

2020

1020

2.5

2.5

=0

1.5

I

K*

K*I

1.5

TDBEM

t=1.0210

t=1.02105

t=1.02104

0.5

0.5

t=1.0210

=0

t cL/h

(b)

0.7

TDBEM

50100

3070

2040

2020

1020

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.45

0.4

0.35

0.3

=0

K*

IV

*

KIV

(b)

t c /h

0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

TDBEM

0.2

t=1.0210

0.1

t=1.0210

0.1

0.05

t=1.0210

t=1.0210

0

0

t cL/h

Fig. 15. Normalized dynamic stress intensity factor (a) and normalized dynamic

electrical displacement intensity factor (b) versus dimensionless time for different

mesh sizes.

and the computed results for the NDIFs are presented in Fig. 6 in

comparison with the ones obtained by the TDBEM [15] and the

FEM using ANSYS software [15]. A very good agreement among

them is found, which further conrms the high accuracy of the

present X-FEM. Similar to the TDBEM solutions, it is also seen that

the X-FEM results contain some peaks and small spikes, which may

be induced by the reected and the scattered elastic waves from

the top and the bottom boundaries as well as the crack-faces.

Next, we analyze the effects of the intensity of the electrical impact loading on the NDIFs. By doing that, the loading parameter k is

thus varied and taken as 0.5, 0.25, 0.0, 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0, and the

NDIFs are evaluated individually and then depicted in Fig. 7 including the TDBEM solutions [15]. The comparison shows an excellent

agreement between each other for each value of the loading

parameter. The global behaviors of the inuences of the intensity

of the electrical impact on the NDIFs obtained by the X-FEM are

similar to those of the TDBEM. The maximum values of the NDIFs

are reduced with increasing k, and it is seen in Fig. 7 that the electrical impact affects the K I -factor signicantly. The peak values of

the NDIFs are decreased with increasing the electrical loading. If

only a pure mechanical loading is applied (i.e. k 0:0; K I 0 until

the mechanical wave impinges on the crack at the normalized time

around t = 1.0. In this case, the elastic waves induced by the

mechanical impact require some time to reach and open the crack.

In contrast, if an electric loading is applied, the variation of the K I

=0

t c /h

L

Fig. 16. Normalized dynamic stress intensity factor (a) and normalized dynamic

electrical displacement intensity factor (b) versus dimensionless time for different

time steps.

electrical eld, which means that the cracked plate is immediately

subjected to an electrical impact and the crack thus opens at t = 0.

The mode-IV factor seems weakly dependent on the time, which is

also a consequence of the quasi-electrostatic assumption of the

electrical eld. As a result, it leads to a strong dependence on the

load parameter k.

6.1.4. Poling direction effect

The inuence of the orientation of the material poling direction

with respect to the y-axis on the NDIFs is now analyzed. The investigation is, respectively, carried out for four different polarization

angles such as 0, 30, 60 and 90. It is noted here that the plate

size is reset to

h = 20.0 mm, and the velocity of the longitudinal

p

wave to cL C 22 =q, so that the results computed can be compared with those based on the time-domain collocation-Galerkin

boundary element method (TDGBEM) [17]. Figs. 810 show a comparison of the NDIFs derived from both methods, where an excellent agreement for all the considered angles is obtained. As

found by Wnsche et al. in [17] that the normalized static stress

intensity factors do not change for different rotation angles,

whereas the normalized dynamic stress intensity factors (see Figs.

8 and 9) have a signicant dependence on the poling angle h, which

may be induced by the scattered wave eld. The same behavior is

obtained by both methods as observed in Fig. 10 for the normalized

electrical displacement intensity factor, which implies that when

254

(a)

1

TDBEM

Present XFEM

0.9

=0.0

=0.25

0.8

=0.5

0.7

KII

=1.0

=1.0

0.6

0.5

0.4

=0.5

0.3

0.2 =0.25

0.1

0

=0.0

10

t c /h

L

Fig. 19. Normalized dynamic mode-II stress intensity factor versus dimensionless

time for different loading parameter k.

(b) 0.015

0.01

0.2

0.005

0

=0.0

0

0.2

=0.25

0.005

0.4

*

IV

0.01

0.015

=0.5

0.6

0.8

=1.0

Fig. 17. A nite piezoelectric plate with a slanted edge crack subjected to an impact

load (a); A regular ne mesh of 5000 quadrilateral elements (b).

1.2

TDBEM

Present XFEM

1.4

0

10

t c /h

L

1.6

TDBEM

Present XFEM

1.4

=0.25

1.2

angles h = 0 and h = 30. Basically, the pictures show the propagation of the elastic waves induced by the combined mechanical and

electrical impact loading, due to which the elastic waves start,

reach and open the crack and then reect, respectively.

=0.5

KI

versus dimensionless time for different loading parameter k.

=0.0

0.8

=1.0

0.6

=1.0

0.4

0.2

=0.5

=0.25

=0.0

10

t cL/h

Fig. 18. Normalized dynamic mode-I stress intensity factor versus dimensionless

time for different loading parameter k.

factors increase, and they are equal to zero when h = 90 since

the piezoelectric effect vanishes for a crack parallel to the poling

direction.

Additionally, for better views Figs. 11 and 12 present, respectively, the scattered elastic waves at four different dimensionless

time-steps, e.g., t = 0.5, 1.16, 2.5 and 4.3, for two different poling

the top and the bottom boundary of a nite homogeneous piezoelectric plate as depicted in Fig. 13. The geometry of the plate is given by h = 20.0 mm and the crack-length a = 2.4 mm. The problem

is solved by using a regular ne mesh of 50 100 = 5000 quadrilateral elements. To take into account the effects of the intensity of

the electrical impact on the NDIFs, four values of the loading

parameter k = 0, 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 are examined, respectively, and

the gained results for the NDIFs are presented in Fig. 14 in comparison with the TDBEM solutions [15]. Here again, the agreement between both sets of the numerical results is very good and it is

found again that increasing the intensity of the impact electrical

loading leads to a decrease of the maximum NDIFs.

In other words, the effects of mesh sensitivity and time-step on

the NDIFs are additionally analyzed, and their calculated results of

the NDIFs are presented in Figs. 15 and 16, respectively, accounted

255

(a)

(a)

4

=1.0

3

=0.0

*

I

2

=1.0

1

=1.0

=0.0

1

=1.0

TDGBEM

Present XFEM

2

0

t cL/h

(b)

(b)

0.015

1.5

=1.0

0.01

TDGBEM

Present XFEM

0.5

K*

IV

0.005

0

0

=0.0

0.5

0.005

0.01

=1.0

1.5

0.015

0

0

0.005

0.01

0.015 0.02

0.025 0.03

0.035 0.04

Fig. 21. A nite piezoelectric plate with two equal collinear cracks subjected to an

impact load (a). A regular ne mesh of 6000 quadrilateral elements (b).

for the case k = 0. Very good convergences of the NDIFs with respect to the mesh can be seen in Fig. 15, and less accuracy on

the DNIFs is found for the coarse meshes as compared with the reference solutions. A similar manner is also found for large timesteps, which essentially reduce the accuracy of the DNIFs as depicted in Fig. 16. As a consequence, it generally reveals a rigorous

requirement that in order for gaining an acceptable solution an

adequately small time-step and a ne mesh must be used in the

present X-FEM formulation.

6.3. A slanted edge crack in a nite piezoelectric plate

Next, the third example deals with a mixed-mode problem with

a slanted edge crack of length a in a homogeneous and linear piezoelectric plate as depicted in Fig. 17a. The geometrical parameters

of the cracked plate are given by h = 22.0 mm, w = 32.0 mm,

c = 6.0 mm and a = 22.63 mm. The crack has an inclination angle

of 45 with respect to the vertical plate boundary as shown in

the gure. Similarly, a regular ne mesh of 100 50 = 5000 quadrilateral elements is applied (see Fig. 17b).

As considered in the previous example, four different values of

the loading parameter k = 0, 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 are considered to see

how the intensity of the electrical impact alters the NDIFs in this

mixed-mode crack problem. Once again, the computed NDIFs as

presented in Figs. 1820 match well with those derived from the

TDBEM [17]. The K I and K II factors are, however, independent on

the intensity of the electrical impact in two small time ranges as

t cL/h

Fig. 22. Normalized dynamic stress intensity factor (a) and normalized dynamic

electrical displacement intensity factor (b) versus dimensionless time for different

loading parameter k.

of the curves in the previous example for the K I , whereas the K IV

factor in both cases is similar.

The last example considers a nite piezoelectric plate with two

equal cracks subjected to a coupled impact tensile and electrical

loading on the top and bottom boundary of the plate. The plate

is made of BaTiO3 (see Table 1 for its constants) and the geometry

is shown in Fig. 21a with h = 16.0 mm, w = 20.0 mm, d = 12.0 mm

and a = 2.0 mm. In this example, a regular ne mesh of

100 60 = 6000 quadrilateral elements is used, see Fig. 21b. Again,

different loading parameters k = 0, 1.0 and 1.0 are examined,

respectively, and the corresponding NDIFs at tip B are then presented in Fig. 22. The obtained NDIFs are compared with the

TDGBEM solutions [17] and the agreement is very good. As stated

in [17], it is again found in the present X-FEM results that the global behavior of different curves is not much different for the applied loading, but has a signicant jump in the peak values.

Furthermore, Fig. 23 additionally shows the scattered elastic

waves at four different dimensionless time-steps as in the previous

example, i.e., t = 0.5, 1.16, 2.5 and 4.3. Only the poling angle h = 0

is considered here for the visualization and a very similar behavior

to those as shown in the rst example (Fig. 11) is observed.

256

Fig. 23. Scattered elastic waves at four different normalized time-steps tfor the poling angle h = 0.

7. Conclusions

In this work, transient stationary dynamic crack analysis in 2D

homogeneous and linear piezoelectric solids is presented. A dynamic X-FEM integrated with the sixfold enrichment functions as

well as the implicit time integration scheme is developed for this

purpose. To extract the relevant dynamic intensity factors, an

interaction integral for linear piezoelectric materials utilizing the

domain-form taking the inertial effect into account is implemented. To verify the accuracy of the present X-FEM, numerical results for the NDIFs are presented and compared with the TDBEM

[15], TDGBEM [17] and FEM [15]. The effects of the combined

mechanical and electrical impacts, polarization direction, mesh

sensitivity, time-step, etc. on the NDIFs are analyzed and discussed

in details. From the numerical results for the NDIFs derived from

the proposed X-FEM, it can be concluded that the present X-FEM

is stable and accurate, and the agreement of the present numerical

results with other available reference solutions is very good. As a

result, the present X-FEM is general and has no limitations on

the crack geometry and loading conditions. As future research

works, crack growth problems, other electric crack-face boundary

conditions [34], crack-face contact, and multiple cracks in piezoelectric solids under dynamic impact loading conditions would

be very interesting and should be simulated by using X-FEM.

In other words, the computational efciency of the X-FEM

developed for the dynamic problem is almost dependent on the

time that we specify in the time integration scheme. Just estimating the computational times of solving the equations systems of

the stiffness and mass matrices as well as the force vector does

not make too much sense. It is because the meshing tasks of a complicated domain by rigorously requiring a conforming mesh to the

crack-faces and re-meshing in crack growth are those that cost

most of the human labors and time-consuming works in the conventional FEM. Contradictorily, the X-FEM is dominant over the

FEM in this particular case due to the mesh independence of the

crack geometry. Nonetheless, further information and other issues

regarding the superior advantages, robustness, convergences, ef-

reach, e.g., see [3538], and many others available in the literature.

Acknowledgment

The nancial support of the German Research Foundation (DFG)

under the Project No. ZH 15/14-1 is gratefully acknowledged.

Appendix A. Derivation of the characteristic equation

In the present work, we restrict our analysis to the plane-strain

condition and the constitutive equations are thus expressed as

follows

8

9

exx >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

e

yy >

>

>

>

>

>

>

<

=

a11

6

6 a

6 12

6

6

cxy 6

6 0

>

>

>

>

6

>

>

>

>

6

>

>

>

> 6 0

E

x >

>

>

>

4

>

>

>

>

>

>

:

;

Ey

b21

a12

a22

a33

b13

b13

d11

b22

9

38

rxx >

b21 >

>

>

>

>

>

7>

>

>

>

>

7

>

>

>

r

b22 7>

yy >

>

>

>

>

7>

=

7<

s

0 7

xy

7>

>

>

7>

>

>

>

7>

>

>

D

0 7>

x >

>

>

>

>

5>

>

>

>

>

>

:

;

D

d22

y

A:1

in which the coefcients aij, bij and dij indicate the reduced material

constants and more details can be found in [26].

The complex potential functions U(x) and v(x) are introduced

by applying the extended Lekhnitskiis formalism to the piezoelectric materials, which are related to the mechanical stresses and

electrical displacements by

@ 2 Ux

@ 2 Ux

; ryy

;

2

@y

@x2

@ vx

@ vx

Dx

; Dy

@y

@x

rxx

sxy

@ 2 Ux

@x@y

A:2

It should be noted that the equilibrium Eq. (1) without the inertial term are automatically satised by Eq. (A.2). Using the constitutive equations, in which the stresses and the electric

functions U(x) and v(x), the compatibility equations can be reduced to a sixth order differential equation for U(x) [26,33]

L4 L2 Ux L3 L3 Ux 0

A:3

where

L2 d22

@2

@2

d11 2 ;

2

@x

@y

L3 b22

[16]

@3

@3

b12 b13

3

@x

@x@y2

A:4

@4

@4

@4

L4 a22 4 a11 4 2a12 a33 2 2

@x

@y

@x @y

[19]

[20]

l lre ilim

A:5

Substituting the solution Eq. (A.5) into Eq. (A.3), the characteristic

equation of the differential equation (A.3) may be expressed in

terms of l as

6

a11 d11 l a11 d22 2a12 a33 d11 b12 b12 2b13

2

b13

a22 d22

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

2

b22

[17]

[18]

Ux Ux ly with

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

A:6

[27]

[28]

[29]

References

[1] Y.E. Pak, Int. J. Fract. 54 (1992) 79100.

[2] T. Hughes, The Finite Element Method Linear Static and Dynamic Finite

Element Analysis, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1987.

[3] G. Beer, I. Smith, C. Duenser, The Boundary Element Method with

Programming For Engineers and Scientists, Springer-Verlag/Wien,

Germany, 2008.

[4] M. Kuna, Eng. Fract. Mech. 77 (2010) 309326.

[5] M. Kuna, Arch. Appl. Mech. 76 (2006) 725745.

[6] L. Janski, M. Scherzer, P. Steinhorst, M. Kuna, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 81

(2010) 14921513.

[7] M. Scherzer, M. Kuna, Int. J. Fract. 127 (2004) 6199.

[8] M. Kuna, Comput. Mater. Sci. 13 (1998) 6780.

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

257

M. Enderlein, A. Ricoeur, M. Kuna, Int. J. Fract. 134 (2005) 191208.

O. Gruebner, M. Kamlah, D. Munz, Eng. Fract. Mech. 70 (2003) 13991413.

M. Abendroth, U. Groh, M. Kuna, A. Ricoeur, Int. J. Fract. 114 (2002) 359378.

E. Pan, Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 23 (1999) 6776.

R.K.N.D. Rajapakse, X.L. Xu, Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 25 (2001) 771781.

F. Garcia-Sanchez, Ch. Zhang, A. Saez, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 197

(2008) 31083121.

F. Garcia-Sanchez, Ch. Zhang, J. Sladek, V. Sladek, Comput. Mater. Sci. 39 (2007)

179186.

M. Wnsche, F. Garcia-Sanchez, A. Saez, Ch. Zhang, Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 34

(2010) 377387.

K.M. Liew, Y. Sun, S. Kitipornchai, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 69 (2007) 729

749.

C.W. Liu, E. Taciroglu, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 67 (2006) 15651586.

J. Sladek, V. Sladek, Ch. Zhang, P. Solek, L. Starek, CMES Comput. Model. Eng.

Sci. 19 (2007) 247262.

J. Sladek, V. Sladek, Ch. Zhang, P. Solek, E. Pan, Int. J. Fract. 145 (2007) 313326.

J. Sladek, V. Sladek, P. Solek, A. Saez, Int. J. Solids Struct. 45 (2008) 45234542.

T. Belytschko, T. Black, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 45 (1999) 601620.

N. Moes, J. Dolbow, T. Belytschko, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 46 (1999) 131

150.

J.M. Melenk, I. Babuska, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 139 (1996) 289

314.

E. Bchet, M. Scherzer, M. Kuna, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 77 (2009) 1535

1565.

R.R. Bhargava, K. Sharma, Comput. Mater. Sci. 50 (2011) 18341845.

R.R. Bhargava, K. Sharma, Int. J. Mech. Des. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/

s10999-012-9182-x.

R. Rojas-Diaz, N. Sukumar, A. Saez, F. Garcia-Sanchez, Int. J. Numer. Methods

Eng. 88 (2011) 12381259.

B.B. Rao, M. Kuna, Int. J. Solids Struct. 45 (2008) 52375257.

M. Stolarska, D.L. Chopp, N. Moes, T. Belytschko, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 51

(2001) 943960.

G. Ventura, E. Budyn, T. Belytschko, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng 58 (2003)

15711592.

H.A. Sosa, Y.E. Pak, Int. J. Solids Struct. 26 (1990) 115.

J. Sladek, V. Sladek, Ch. Zhang, M. Wunsche, CMES Comput. Model. Eng. Sci.

68 (2010) 158220.

T.P. Fries, T. Belytschko, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 84 (2010) 253304.

T. Belytschko, R. Gracie, G. Ventura, Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 17 (2009)

043001.

A. Yazid, N. Abdelkader, H. Abdelmadjid, Appl. Math. Model. 33 (2009) 4269

4282.

Y. Abdelaziz, A. Hamouine, Comput. Struct. 86 (2008) 11411151.

- BR1452513184IITH (FEM 2016 Invitation Brochure)Diunggah olehArkayReddy
- Mechanical Engg 2014Diunggah olehvignanaraj
- Daten BlattDiunggah olehPriyatham Gangapatnam
- cfdDiunggah olehpride3351
- Aeroelasticity.pdfDiunggah olehFabio Barros
- Dispensa Da Fare MatlabDiunggah olehFrank Whittle
- Review of Matrices and VectorsDiunggah olehchanphat01001
- 00261Diunggah olehAndres Suarez
- Chapter 01 Higher Order Weight Functions in Fracture Mechanics of MultimaterialsDiunggah olehJorge Perdigon
- FTEE_77_70Diunggah olehMariya Pavlova
- Lecture 1Diunggah olehLope Lh
- DifferenceEquations-pDiunggah olehRishi Kant Sharma
- Structure Dynamics.docxDiunggah olehSimranAhluwalia
- Heidergots0_8120.pdfDiunggah olehImam Fauzi
- ICDERS2007-0112Diunggah olehAristide Basurto
- eigenDiunggah olehcoolsome42
- WCECS2008_pp1166-1171_2Diunggah olehPavan
- r5.05.02Diunggah olehAlejandro Vega
- [Carcione,_et_al.]_Seismic_modeling(BookZZ.org).pdfDiunggah olehOussama Khelil
- vinayak iyer pdfDiunggah olehapi-258289378
- Buckley ArticuloDiunggah olehmarflo9989
- Papers_Analysis of Two Partial-least-Squares Algorithms for Multivariate CalibrationDiunggah oleh_Ririn_Adam_Ci_5450
- FEM_NotesDiunggah olehanwar
- Zp PlaceDiunggah olehKrishna Bharadwaj
- 4-C0-Continuity-Isoparametric (1)Diunggah olehIvana305
- math2019_s2_13_exam (1)Diunggah olehZaeed Huq
- 0538735457_252355Diunggah olehEdwin Johny Asnate Salazar
- CourseDiunggah olehTalha
- FractureMechanicsWebinarSeries Part3 XFEM MeshlessDiunggah olehPablo Coll
- AMLS Users ManualDiunggah olehOytun Peksel

- A First Course in Elementary Differential EquationsDiunggah olehjdsparagas
- 2015 H2 Set G Solutions (7) Binomial & Poisson Distributions-2Diunggah olehMun Yen Loi
- 3babscp3.pdfDiunggah olehRamanji
- GaussDiunggah olehmilicaksm
- Code conversion FEM - XFEMDiunggah olehjacobess
- DTSP EXTC Viva Questions AnswerDiunggah olehHitesh Chavan
- u9l6 - completing the square lesson planDiunggah olehapi-242122700
- Form 4 Test1Diunggah olehana rosli
- 21121058 Fibonacci NumbersDiunggah olehTom Davis
- SVM_hype or HallelujahDiunggah olehVaibhav Jain
- 1606.01868v1Diunggah olehSherjil Ozair
- RMO Solved Paper 2013 Mumbai RegionDiunggah olehgeddam06108825
- 19_4Diunggah olehMahyar Zobeidi
- IFEM.Ch31Diunggah olehvsbalint
- ENTANGLEMENT OF FORMATION AND CONCURRENCE.pdfDiunggah olehDaniel Orsini
- MCR3U Final Exam Topics and Textbook Review Questions1Diunggah olehDebora Panda
- Strut Apparatus(a)Diunggah olehaida
- Tsunamis-and-hurricanes-a-mathematical-approach.pdfDiunggah olehMiguel Neves
- FiniteDiunggah olehFirdaus Al-Amin
- Guide to MYP eAssessment.pdfDiunggah olehAnurag
- Complex CrouDiunggah olehgautamee
- EXERCISES-Misc.docDiunggah olehMelissa San Joaquin
- arcsinDiunggah olehbibbiblos
- Bela Bollobás, Oliver Riordan-Percolation -Cambridge University Press (2006)Diunggah olehEmanuel Fontelles
- Sobel Erosion Dilation ExamplesDiunggah olehha has
- garrett.pdfDiunggah olehGustavo Guzman
- Kinematics of CM 09 Rigid Body RotationsDiunggah olehsujayan2005
- 10.1.1.645.6859Diunggah olehJuanCa Barbosa
- A. Huseynov, G.S. GuseinovDiunggah olehlaputamadre1
- CasioSharp Vol 2aDiunggah olehtranduclong