Solid Edge V20 Crack License Key
As an essential component of the modeling framework presented in , interface solid elements (ISE), i.e., degenerated solid finite elements with almost zero thickness proposed by Manzoli et al. [18,19,20,21], have been adopted and successfully applied to the failure analysis of plain and fiber-reinforced concrete structures. As compared with classical zero-thickness interface elements, ISE can be easily implemented based on standard finite element codes by using solid finite elements for the bulk material and for the interfaces. Employing a continuum damage model to approximate the interface degradation, it allows one to describe the interface behavior completely in the continuum framework. Consequently, those specific variational formulations, discrete constitutive relations and integration rules to obtain the internal forces associated with classical interface elements are not required. The artificial initial stiffness that is normally required in zero-thickness interface elements is automatically included in the elastic stiffness of ISE [18,20,21]. It is recognized that the interface solid elements share similar features with zero-thickness interface elements. The most notable advantage of this class of models is the fact that no special procedure for the tracking of evolving cracks is necessary. This contributes to its robustness and allows for 3D fracture simulations characterized by complex fracture patterns (see, e.g., ). The crack pattern obtained via discrete representations along prescribed element edges evidently suffers from a certain dependence on the mesh topology. However, the influence on the overall macroscopic material response is tolerable if unstructured meshes with reasonable resolution are used [20,23]. Furthermore, for analyses of heterogeneous materials on the mesoscale level, it was shown that the mesh-dependence of interface elements becomes less of a concern once the mesoscale heterogeneity is modeled [24,25,26]. This drawback can be alleviated, e.g., by continuously modifying the local finite element topology at the crack tip to enforce the alignment between the element edges and the crack propagation direction [27,28,29]. Alternatively, mesh refinement, at the cost of increased computational expense, can be applied to resolve the large elements along the crack path [30,31,32]. The increased computational demand resulting from the duplication of finite element nodes can be controlled by pre-defining the interface elements only in vulnerable regions or applying an adaptive algorithm for the mesh processing during computation [33,34,35,36,37].
solid edge v20 crack license key
All bulk elements are considered to be linear elastic. The constitutive behavior of the degenerated solid elements is cast in a continuum form equipped with a damage law, which allows one to approximate the behavior of interfacial degradation mechanisms involved during the cracking in FRC materials:
It is noticed that the post-cracking behavior of the FRC material is highly nonlinear; such nonlinearity frequently results in numerical difficulties while performing structural simulations. In the present work, the IMPL-EXintegration scheme  is implemented in the context of the interface solid element for FRC. Consequently, due to the explicit nature of damage models, the computation does not require any iteration, neither on the structural level, nor on the constitutive level. This ensures the robustness and efficiency of the computational model in failure analyses of FRC structures even in the case of complex crack configurations.
Analysis of a three-point bending test on a notched FRC beam: (a) photo of the failure state of the specimen and the contour plot of the crack-opening magnitude in the deformed configuration; (b) crack patterns represented by the activated interface solid elements at different loading states; (c) comparison between the force-displacement relations predicted by the proposed model and from the experiments  for three different fiber cocktails.
Pre-processing (insertion of interface solid elements in the complete domain): (a) original finite element mesh; (b) phantom mesh obtained by duplicating the edges and shrinking the bulk elements; (c) actual mesh for computation, obtained after insertion of solid elements into all interfacial gaps.
Results of the 2D simulation of uniaxial tension on a square specimen: (a) computed structural responses and crack pattern; (b) evolution of the relative problem sizes regarding the system degree of freedom and number of elements, as well as all of the created interface solid elements (blue lines in the mesh).
8. Verification.ASTM has the right to verify compliance with this Agreement, at its expense, and at any time during the course of normal business hours. To do so, ASTM will engage an independent consultant, subject to a confidentiality agreement, to review Licensee's use of ASTM Product and/or Documents. Licensee agrees to permit access to its information and computer systems for this purpose. Verification will take place upon no less than 15 days notice, during normal business hours and in a manner that does not interfere unreasonably with Licensee's operations. If verification reveals unlicensed or prohibited use of the ASTM Products or Documents, Licensee agrees to reimburse ASTM for the costs incurred in verification and reimburse ASTM for any unlicensed/prohibited uses. By invoking this procedure, ASTM does not waive any of its rights to enforce this Agreement or to protect its intellectual property by any other means permitted by law. Licensee acknowledges and agrees that ASTM may imbed certain identifying or tracking information in the ASTM Products available on the Portal.