2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.enganabound.2014.04.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Crack growth modeling in elastic solids by the extended meshfree Galerkin radial point interpolation method

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 119 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These methods do not require any discretization of the problem domain, and therefore, the approximate solution of the problem is obtained using a set of scattered nodes. One of the attractions of the meshless methods may be devoted to their flexibility in dealing with discontinuities (such as cracks) [20][21][22][23][24]. The FFEM was firstly developed to calculate the SIFs for cracked domains [25,26].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These methods do not require any discretization of the problem domain, and therefore, the approximate solution of the problem is obtained using a set of scattered nodes. One of the attractions of the meshless methods may be devoted to their flexibility in dealing with discontinuities (such as cracks) [20][21][22][23][24]. The FFEM was firstly developed to calculate the SIFs for cracked domains [25,26].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unlike the FEM, meshfree method uses a set of scattered nodes to model the domain and approximate the field variables. Because no finite element or mesh is required in the approximation, meshfree methods are very suitable for modeling crack growth problems [17][18][19][20].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main property of these methods may be devoted to their efficiency in handling moving boundaries and discontinuities (eg, cracks), as well as their ability of elaborating the crack tip by employment of enriched basis functions according to the asymptotic displacement field in their vicinity. In mesh‐free methods, it is needed to perform remeshing for the movement of nodes surrounding the tip of the crack as the crack propagates . Unlike the high accuracy of mesh‐free methods, their time‐consuming and more computational cost techniques may be considered as their main disadvantages …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%