2020
DOI: 10.1103/physreve.102.012801
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Understanding interfacial fracture behavior between microinterlocked soft layers using physics-based cohesive zone modeling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In such cases, the primary recourse to accurately determine the cut-off stress and process zone size is via molecular dynaimcs simulations [44] and physically motivated cohesive zone models [45]. For compressible materials such as rubbery polymers, this is not so; infinite tensile stresses at the edges of contact are in fact common with adhesion problems in soft materials [37].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In such cases, the primary recourse to accurately determine the cut-off stress and process zone size is via molecular dynaimcs simulations [44] and physically motivated cohesive zone models [45]. For compressible materials such as rubbery polymers, this is not so; infinite tensile stresses at the edges of contact are in fact common with adhesion problems in soft materials [37].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further, our computational simulation showed a significant influence of muscle contraction, which tends to relax the compressive stress around the connecting surface for easy release. In a follow‐up study, 10 we biomimicked lizard tail autotomy and related muscle contraction using soft microinterlocking structures 7 that can be actuated on‐demand via subsurface soft patch, showing high‐end tunable adhesion. Here too, the computer modelling identified C‐G and L‐T as the inherent toughening mechanisms.…”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…3, C to H and I to N (summarized in table S1), show that adhesion energy and peak force significantly decreased in peel mode (see experimental details in supplementary text 5), demonstrating the fracture’s mode-dependent vulnerability. The difference in mode-dependent results can be explained by the equal load sharing of the micropillars ( 5 ), which was quantified by comparing the associated characteristic stress decay lengths ( 6 , 7 ). We recorded a 17-fold difference between the modes (see the “Equal load sharing calculation” section in supplementary text 5).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The hierarchical toughening can be explained as follows. First, the nanoporous-assisted contact on top of the micropillars exerts a crack-arresting effect that can be explained by the crack initiation at multiple discontinuities plus the coplanar Cook-Gordon mechanism ( 7 , 8 ) that imparted repulsive stress interactions between the vicinal coplanar cracks ( 8 , 9 ) during propagation. This greatly contributed toward the intrinsic ( 10 ) fracture toughening mechanism at the interface.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation