A comparison of phase field models of brittle fracture incorporating strength: I -- Mixed-mode loading

Abstract

The classical variational phase-field model for brittle fracture effectively predicts the growth of large pre-existing cracks. However, the modeling of crack nucleation continues to be a significant challenge. Crack nucleation under uniform stress depends on the material's strength surface whose description is fundamentally incompatible with the energy-based Griffith propagation criterion. To address this, three main phase-field approaches have emerged, each attempting to reconcile material strength and toughness. The first, known as the classical variational approach, preserves the variational structure but fails to accurately incorporate the strength surface. In contrast, the other two approaches -- the complete nucleation and hybrid cohesive zone models -- sacrifice variational consistency. Among these, only the complete nucleation approach precisely accounts for the strength surface. All three approaches, especially the second one, deviate from the sharp variational theory of brittle fracture, raising concerns about their reliability in predicting the growth of cracks under non-mode-I loading. This paper evaluates precisely this issue. It is the first in a series of studies comparing the three approaches, systematically investigating crack growth under mode II, mode III, and mixed-mode loadings. The results confirm that the complete nucleation approach effectively predicts crack growth across all investigated problems, and its predictions agree well with those from other two approaches for tension-dominated cases. Additionally, the findings highlight that inaccurate accounting of the strength surface in the classical variational approach can influence crack path predictions. Lastly, they reveal that modifying the crack driving force to incorporate the strength surface in the hybrid cohesive zone approach causes crack propagation at an incorrect fracture toughness.