2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0143-7496(00)00024-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Two- and three-dimensional geometrical nonlinear finite elements for analysis of adhesive joints

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
31
0
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 94 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
3
31
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Meanwhile, the relationship between the traction and separation is defined as the interface cohesive law for the fracture process. The CZMs have evolved as a preferred method to analyze fracture problems because: (1) it avoids the stress singularity and considers the physical fracture process in a more realistic manner (Hillerborg et al 1976;Rose et al 1983;Needleman 1987;Tvergaard 1990;Tvergaard and Hutchinson 1994); (2) it can be readily incorporated in the traditional numerical analysis, such as in finite element method (Tvergaard and Hutchinson 1992;Xu and Needleman 1993;Corigliano 1993;Tvergaard and Hutchinson 1996;Camacho and Ortiz 1996;Chowdhury and Narasimhan 2000;Yang et al 2001;Alfano and Crisfield 2001;Andruet et al 2001;Pardoen et al 2005;Salomonsson and Andersson 2008;Parrinello et al 2009;Yan and Shang 2009;de Moura et al 2009). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meanwhile, the relationship between the traction and separation is defined as the interface cohesive law for the fracture process. The CZMs have evolved as a preferred method to analyze fracture problems because: (1) it avoids the stress singularity and considers the physical fracture process in a more realistic manner (Hillerborg et al 1976;Rose et al 1983;Needleman 1987;Tvergaard 1990;Tvergaard and Hutchinson 1994); (2) it can be readily incorporated in the traditional numerical analysis, such as in finite element method (Tvergaard and Hutchinson 1992;Xu and Needleman 1993;Corigliano 1993;Tvergaard and Hutchinson 1996;Camacho and Ortiz 1996;Chowdhury and Narasimhan 2000;Yang et al 2001;Alfano and Crisfield 2001;Andruet et al 2001;Pardoen et al 2005;Salomonsson and Andersson 2008;Parrinello et al 2009;Yan and Shang 2009;de Moura et al 2009). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other FE modelling researchers [7][8][9] have formulated special adhesive joint elements, but none of these are to be found in commercially FE codes [10]. Modelling a relatively thin adhesive layer (< 1 mm thick) with solid (brick) elements produces models with too many degrees of freedom (d.o.f.…”
Section: Pagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach was used in References [1][2][3]. More recent FE-models of adhesive joints that can be sorted into this category can be found in References [4][5][6]. In Reference [4] the adherends were modelled as orthotropic plates (laminates) in cylindrical bending using assumptions as in classical laminate theory.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Reference [4] the adherends were modelled as orthotropic plates (laminates) in cylindrical bending using assumptions as in classical laminate theory. In References [5,6], it was assumed that the adherends behave as shells and the adhesive layer was modelled as a 3-D solid (using brick elements). To obtain continuity of displacements at the adherend-adhesive interfaces, a set of interpolation functions was used.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%