Anda di halaman 1dari 15

Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Computational Materials Science


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

Extended nite element simulation of stationary dynamic cracks


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

the experimental works, the numerical methods have thus become


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

collocation-Galerkin BEM (TDGBEM) has been implemented by


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

the results obtained by the proposed X-FEM are presented, veried


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. Problem statement and asymptotic crack-tip eld


2.1. Problem statement
Let us consider a 2D homogeneous and linear piezoelectric solid

containing a traction-free crack CC C


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

rij;j fimech  qui 0; Di;i  f elec 0; on X

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]

rij C ijkl ekl  elij El ; Di eikl ekl jil El

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

eij ui;j uj;i ; Ei u;i

In the piezoelectric initial-boundary value problem, the primary


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

The initial conditions at time t = 0 are specied as

_ 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

where i, j = 1, 2, and the summation over N = {II, I, III, IV} comprises


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

3.1. Enriched nite element approximation


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

e j xHf h x  Hfj aj


N

cut

l2N

e j xHf h x  Hfj cj


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

feature in treating the discontinuities. Within the X-FEM, the nite


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.

C i2k1 C i2k2 p- Ak-

e1i2 e2i2 p- A4-

e2k1 e2k2 p- Ak-

j21  j22 p- A4-


13

3. X-FEM for stationary dynamic piezoelectric crack problems


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

qm x~h; h; lmre ; lim


m
1
p
2

4
re
jlm j2 lm sin2x  jlm j2  1 cos2x

19

3.2. Weak-form and discrete equations


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

Substituting the enriched approximated functions in Eq. (14)


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

whereas for the non-enriched elements

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

for the enriched elements, whereas


e

fi fi

25

for the non-enriched elements.


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

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

Bbi Bbi 1 Bbi 2 Bbi 3 Bbi 4 Bbi 5 Bbi 6 


in which each
(31) but e
SN F
mented instead.

d_ tDt

36

4. Interaction integral and generalized dynamic intensity


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]

It is noted that in Eq. (31) the term e


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

Bri T CBsj dX; r; s U; a; b

@ 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

3.3. Implicit time integration scheme


Z 
@ui
@u
nj dC
Wd1j  rij
 Dj
@x1
@x1
C

where the indices i and j vary from 1 to 2 in 2D piezoelectric solid,


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

The unconditionally stable implicit Newmark time integration


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

The accelerations in the Newmark method without damping effect


are given by



2
t
tDt FtDt  K dt Dt d_ t 1  2b
~Dt 2 Kd
~ Dt d
M b
2

34

in which Dt denotes the time-step and d_ represents the velocity


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

with A being the area inside an arbitrary contour enclosing the


~ 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

where J and J represent the electromechanical J-integrals for the


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

248

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

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

is an interaction integral for the two states, in which

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

where K = {KIIKIKIIIKIV}T is the vector of the four intensity factors,


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

To extract the individual fracture parameters for the actual state,


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

Similarly, other modes can be obtained as


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

5. Key steps of the numerical solution procedure

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).

As a result, the generalized stress intensity factors are obtained by


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

(a)

2.5

(a)

TDBEM
Present XFEM

Poling direction: =00

Poling direction: =00

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

Poling direction: =00

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.

c. Condition 2: enriched elements.


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)

d. Assemble the static stiffness matrix, mass matrix and


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

(a)

1.5

(a)

TDBEM
FEM (ANSYS)
Present XFEM

1.4
1.3

3.5

=0.25

Poling direction: =00

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

(14) Loop over time-steps


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.

meshes of quadrilateral elements are used to ensure the accuracy


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

251

6.1. A central crack in a nite piezoelectric plate

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

6.1.1. Pure mechanical impact loading


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

6.1.2. Pure electrical impact loading


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

Fig. 10. Comparison of the normalized dynamic mode-IV electric displacement


intensity factor versus dimensionless time for different ration angles h obtained by
the TDGBEM [17] and the X-FEM.

for all numerical calculations throughout the study to ensure the


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

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

the direction in the electrical loading controlled by the loading


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.

investigation of the effects induced by the electrical loading on


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

6.1.3. Combined mechanical and electrical impacts


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

(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.

We rst consider the intensity of the electrical impact k = 1.0,


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.

starts from t = 0 due to the quasi-electrostatic assumption for the


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

(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

0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04

=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

Fig. 20. Normalized dynamic mode-IV electrical displacement intensity factor


versus dimensionless time for different loading parameter k.

=0.0

0.8
=1.0

0.6
=1.0

6.2. An edge crack in a nite piezoelectric plate

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.

increasing the poling angle the electrical displacement intensity


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

As the second example, we consider an edge crack parallel to


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

(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.

observed in the gures. It is slightly different from the behavior


of the curves in the previous example for the K I , whereas the K IV
factor in both cases is similar.

6.4. Two equal cracks in a nite piezoelectric plate


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

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-

ciency, etc. of the standard or improved X-FEM fashions, one can


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

T.Q. Bui, C. Zhang / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 243257

displacements are expressed through the two complex potential


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 

l a22 d11 2a12 a33 d22 2b22 b12 b13 l

a22 d22

[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]

2
b22

[17]
[18]

The solution U(x) is given by

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

F. Shang, M. Kuna, M. Abendroth, Eng. Fract. Mech. 70 (2003) 143160.


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.