A COMPARATIVE REVIEW OF PERIDYNAMICS AND PHASE-FIELD MODELS FOR ENGINEERING FRACTURE MECHANICS APREPRINT Patrick Diehl Center of Computation & Technology Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803 Email:
[email protected] Robert Lipton Department of Mathematics Center of Computation & Technology Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70808 Email:
[email protected] Thomas Wick Leibniz Universitat¨ Hannover Institut fur¨ Angewandte Mathematik Welfengarten 1, 30167 Hannover, Germany Email:
[email protected] Mayank Tyagi Craft & Hawkins Department of Petroleum Engineering Center for Computation & Technology Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 70803 Email:
[email protected] July 13, 2021 ABSTRACT Computational modeling of the initiation and propagation of complex fracture is central to the disci- pline of engineering fracture mechanics. This review focuses on two promising approaches: phase- field (PF) and peridynamic (PD) models applied to this class of problems. The basic concepts consisting of constitutive models, failure criteria, discretization schemes, and numerical analysis are briefly summarized for both models. Validation against experimental data is essential for all com- putational methods to demonstrate predictive accuracy. To that end, The Sandia Fracture Challenge and similar experimental data sets where both models could be benchmarked against are showcased. Emphasis is made to converge on common metrics for the evaluation of these two fracture mod- eling approaches. Both PD and PF models are assessed in terms of their computational effort and predictive capabilities with their relative advantages and challenges are summarized. A PREPRINT -JULY 13, 2021 1 Introduction and Wang [7] published a review on the usage of PD in geomaterials in 2021.