Abstract The recently-developed finite-volume direct averaging micromechanics (FVDAM) with progressive damage simulation capability modeled using the cohesive zone model is critically and fully assessed vis-a-vis Abaqus, a widely-adopted commercial finite-element code with cohesive element for the first time. The evolving debonding along the fiber/matrix interface of a unidirectional metal matrix composite is simulated using comparable bilinear traction-displacement separation laws in the two computational approaches. Differences between the two approaches are highlighted, including shortcomings of the Abaqus-based finite-element analysis of evolving damage. These shortcomings include the need of optimizing the compressive stiffness of the interface in order to: avoid material interpenetration; predict correct homogenized response; prevent numerical instabilities. These problems are not present in our version of the finite-volume homogenization approach since the traction-separation relations in the affected normal direction are directly eliminated when the interface is under compression. Nonetheless, comparison of the homogenized response and localized stress fields generated by the finite-element and finite-volume techniques demonstrates good agreement between the two approaches provided that a suitable compression factor is chosen in Abaqus.

中文翻译：

---

通过 FVDAM 和 FEM 方法对具有演化损伤的单向纤维增强复合材料进行均质化和定位：关键评估

摘要 最近开发的有限体积直接平均微力学 (FVDAM) 具有使用内聚区模型建模的渐进损伤模拟能力，相对于 Abaqus 进行了严格和全面的评估，Abaqus 是一种广泛采用的带有内聚元素的商业有限元代码，用于第一次。使用两种计算方法中可比较的双线性牵引-位移分离定律模拟沿单向金属基复合材料的纤维/基体界面演化的脱粘。突出显示了两种方法之间的差异，包括基于 Abaqus 的演化损伤有限元分析的缺点。这些缺点包括需要优化界面的压缩刚度，以便： 避免材料相互渗透；预测正确的均质化反应；防止数值不稳定。这些问题在我们的有限体积均匀化方法版本中不存在，因为当界面处于压缩状态时，直接消除了受影响法线方向上的牵引-分离关系。尽管如此，如果在 Abaqus 中选择了合适的压缩因子，则有限元和有限体积技术生成的均匀响应和局部应力场的比较表明两种方法之间具有良好的一致性。