0
Research Papers: Polar and Arctic Engineering

Simulating Ice-Sloping Structure Interactions With the Cohesive Element Method

[+] Author and Article Information
Wenjun Lu

Sustainable Arctic Marine
and Coastal Technology (SAMCoT),
Centre for Research-Based Innovation (CRI),
Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Høgskoleringen 7A, 7491,
Trondheim, Norway
e-mail: wenjun.lu@ntnu.no

Raed Lubbad

Sustainable Arctic Marine
and Coastal Technology (SAMCoT),
Centre for Research-Based Innovation (CRI),
Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Høgskoleringen 7A, 7491,
Trondheim, Norway
e-mail: raed.lubbad@ntnu.no

Sveinung Løset

Sustainable Arctic Marine
and Coastal Technology (SAMCoT),
Centre for Research-Based Innovation (CRI),
Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Høgskoleringen 7A, 7491,
Trondheim, Norway
e-mail: sveinung.loset@ntnu.no

Usually, to rigorously test a particular numerical method, a much simpler test case and smaller scale is employed (e.g., uniaxial tension test, beam bending test, etc.).

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING Manuscript received August 20, 2012; final manuscript received February 18, 2014; published online April 1, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Arne Gürtner.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 136(3), 031501 (Apr 01, 2014) (16 pages) Paper No: OMAE-12-1084; doi: 10.1115/1.4026959 History: Received August 20, 2012; Revised February 18, 2014

The major processes that occur when level ice interacts with sloping structures (especially wide structures) are the fracturing of ice and upcoming ice fragments accumulating around the structure. The cohesive zone method, which can simulate both fracture initiation and propagation, is a potential numerical method to simulate this process. In this paper, as one of the numerical methods based on the cohesive zone theory, the cohesive-element–based approach was used to simulate both the fracturing and upcoming fragmentation of level ice. However, simulating ice and sloping structure interactions with the cohesive element method poses several challenges. One often-highlighted challenge is its convergence issue. Numerous attempts by different researchers have been invested in this issue either to prove or improve its convergence. However, these researchers work in different fields (e.g., fracture of concrete, ceramic, or glass fiber) with different scales (e.g., from a ceramic ring to a concrete block). As an attempt to study the cohesive element method's application in the current ice-structure interaction context (i.e., an engineering scale up to hundreds of meters), the mesh dependency of the cohesive element method was alleviated by both creating a mesh with a crossed triangle pattern and utilizing a penalty method to obtain the initial stiffness for the intrinsic cohesive elements. Furthermore, two potential methods (i.e., introduction of a random ice field and bulk energy dissipation considerations) to alleviate the mesh dependency problem were evaluated and discussed. Based on a series of simulations with the different aforementioned methods and mesh sizes, the global ice load history is obtained. The horizontal load information is validated against the test results and previous simulation results. According to the comparison, the mesh objectivity alleviation with different approaches was discussed. As a preliminary demonstration, the results of one simulation are summarized, and the load contributions from different ice-structure interaction phases are illustrated and discussed.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Kotras, T. V., Baird, A. V., and Naegle, J. N., 1983, “Predicting Ship Performance in Level Ice,” SNAME Trans, 91, pp. 329–349.
Valanto, P., 2001, “On the Cause and Distribution of Resistance Forces on Ship Hulls Moving in Level Ice,” Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Port and Ocean Engineering Under Arctic Conditions, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, pp. 803–816.
Valanto, P., 2006, “On the Ice Load Distribution on Ship Hulls in Level Ice,” Technical Report No. ICETECH06-110-RF, ICETECH06.
Kämäräinen, J., 2007, Theoretical Investigation on the Effect of Fluid Flow Between the Hull of a Ship and Ice Floes on Ice Resistance in Level Ice, Helsinki University of Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Laboratory for Mechanics of Materials, Helsinki, Finland.
Naegle, J. N., 1980, “Ice-Resistance Prediction and Motion Simulation for Ships Operating in the Continuous Mode of Icebreaking,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Lu, W., Serré, N., Høyland, K. V., and Evers, K.-U., 2013, “Rubble Ice Transport on Arctic Offshore Structures (RITAS), Part IV Tactile Sensor Measurement of the Level Ice Load on Inclined Plate,” Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Port and Ocean Engineering Under Arctic Conditions, Espoo, Finland, pp. 1–14.
Ruiz, G., Ortiz, M., and Pandolfi, A., 2000, “Three-Dimensional Finite-Element Simulation of the Dynamic Brazilian Tests on Concrete Cylinders,” Int. J. Num. Meth. Eng., 48(7), pp. 963–994. [CrossRef]
Falk, M. L., Needleman, A., and Rice, J. R., 2001, “A Critical Evaluation of Cohesive Zone Models of Dynamic Fracture,” J. Phys. IV France, 11, pp. 5–8. [CrossRef]
Molinari, J. F., Gazonas, G., Raghupathy, R., Rusinek, A., and Zhou, F., 2007, “The Cohesive Element Approach to Dynamic Fragmentation: The Question of Energy Convergence,” Int. J. Num. Meth. Eng., 69(3), pp. 484–503. [CrossRef]
Konuk, I., Gürtner, A., and Yu, S., 2009, “A Cohesive Element Framework for Dynamic Ice-Structure Interaction Problems—Part II: Implementation,” ASME 28th Intl. Conf. on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Honolulu, Hawaii, May 31–June 5, Paper No. OMAE2009-80250, pp. 185–193. [CrossRef]
Konuk, I., Gürtner, A., and Yu, S., 2009, “A Cohesive Element Framework for Dynamic Ice-Structure Interaction Problems—Part I: Review and Formulation,” ASME 28th Intl. Conf. on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Honolulu, Hawaii, May 31–June 5, Paper No. OMAE2009-79262, pp. 33–41. [CrossRef]
Konuk, I., and Yu, S., 2010, “A Cohesive Element Framework for Dynamic Ice-Structure Interaction Problems—Part III: Case Studies,” ASME 29th Intl. Conf. on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Shanghai, China, June 6-11, Paper No. OMAE2010-20577, pp. 801–809. [CrossRef]
Gürtner, A., Bjerkås, M., Forsberg, J., and Hilding, D., 2010, “Numerical Modeling of a Full Scale Ice Event,” 20th IAHR Intl. Symposium on Ice, Lahti, Finland.
Gürtner, A., Konuk, I., Gudmestad, O., and Liferov, P., 2008, “Innovative Ice Protection for Shallow Water Drilling: Part III—Finite Element Modeling of Ice Rubble Accumulation,” ASME 27th Intl. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Estoril, Portugal, June 15–20, Paper No. OMAE2008-57915, pp. 981–987. [CrossRef]
Gürtner, A., Konuk, I., and Løset, S., 2008, “A Computational Cohesive Element Model for the Simulation of Ice Drift on Arrangements of Ice Protection Piles,” Computers Struct., pp. 131–141 (submitted).
Kuutti, J., Kolari, K., and Marjavaara, P., 2013, “Simulation of Ice Crushing Experiments with Cohesive Surface Methodology,” Cold Region. Sci. Tech., 92(0), pp. 17–28. [CrossRef]
Hilding, D., Forsberg, J., and Gürtner, A., 2011, “Simulation of Ice Action Loads on Offshore Structures,” 8th European LS-DYNA Users Conference, Strasbourg, France, pp. 1–12. Available at: http://www.dynamore.se/en/resources/papers/konferenz11/papers/session17-paper5.pdf
Lu, W., Lubbad, R., Løset, S., and Høyland, K. V., 2012, “Cohesive Zone Method Based Simulations of Ice Wedge Bending: A Comparative Study of Element Erosion, CEM, DEM and XFEM,” The 21st IAHR International Symposium on Ice, pp. 920–938.
Liu, M. L., and Wu, J. F., 2012, “Numerical Simulation for Ice-Truss Offshore Structure Interactions With Cohesive Zone Model,” IAHR 21st Intl. Symposium on Ice, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China, pp. 814–825.
Hillerborg, A., Modeer, M., and Petersson, P. E., 1976, “Analysis of Crack Formation and Crack Growth in Concrete by Means of Fracture Mechanics and Finite Elements,” Cement Concrete Res., 6(6), pp. 773–781. [CrossRef]
Bažant, Z. P., and Planas, J., 1997, Fracture and Size Effect in Concrete and Other Quasibrittle Materials (New Directions in Civil Engineering), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Mulmule, S., and Dempsey, J. P., 1998, “A Viscoelastic Fictitious Crack Model for the Fracture of Sea Ice,” Mechanics of Time-Dependent Materials, 1(4), pp. 331–356. [CrossRef]
Mulmule, S., and Dempsey, J., 1999, “Scale Effects on Sea Ice Fracture,” Mech. Cohesive Frict. Mat., 4(6), pp. 505–524. [CrossRef]
Mulmule, S., and Dempsey, J., 2000, “LEFM Size Requirements for the Fracture Testing of Sea Ice,” Int. J. Fracture, 102(1), pp. 85–98. [CrossRef]
Dempsey, J., Adamson, R., and Mulmule, S., 1999, “Scale Effects on the in-Situ Tensile Strength and Fracture of Ice. Part II: First-Year Sea Ice at Resolute, NWT,” Int. J. Fracture, 95(1), pp. 347–366. [CrossRef]
Duval, P., and Schulson, E. M., 2009, Creep and Fracture of Ice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 190–211.
Timco, G., and Weeks, W., 2010, “A Review of the Engineering Properties of Sea Ice,” Cold Region. Sci. Tech., 60(2), pp. 107–129. [CrossRef]
Paavilainen, J., and Tuhkuri, J., 2012, “Parameter Effects on Simulated Ice Rubbling Forces on a Wide Sloping Structure,” Cold Region. Sci. Tech., 81, pp. 1–10. [CrossRef]
Paavilainen, J., Tuhkuri, J., and Polojarvi, A., 2010, “Rubble Pile Formation Against an Inclined Structure Analysis of Simulation Results,” IAHR International Symposium on Ice, pp. 1–11.
Paavilainen, J., Tuhkuri, J., and Polojärvi, A., 2009, “2D Combined Finite-Discrete Element Method to Model Multi-Fracture of Beam Structures,” Eng. Computat., 26(6), pp. 578–598. [CrossRef]
Paavilainen, J., Tuhkuri, J., and Polojärvi, A., 2006, “Discrete Element Simulation of Ice Pile-up Against an Inclined Structure,” IAHR 18th International Symposium on Ice, pp. 177–184.
Paavilainen, J., Tuhkuri, J., and Polojärvi, A., 2011, “2D Numerical Simulations of Ice Rubble Formation Process Against an Inclined Structure,” Cold Region. Sci. Tech., 68(1–2), pp. 20–34. [CrossRef]
Zi, G., and Belytschko, T., 2003, “New Crack-Tip Elements for XFEM and Applications to Cohesive Cracks,” Int. J. Num. Meth. Eng., 57(15), pp. 2221–2240. [CrossRef]
Remmers, J. J. C., Borst, R. D., and Needleman, A., 2003, “A Cohesive Segments Method for the Simulation of Crack Growth,” Computat. Math., 31(1–2), pp. 69–77. [CrossRef]
Gürtner, A., 2009, “Experimental and Numerical Investigations of Ice-Structure Interaction,” Ph.D. thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. p. 194.
Xu, X. P., and Needleman, A., 1994, “Numerical Simulations of Fast Crack Growth in Brittle Solids,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 42(9), pp. 1397–1434. [CrossRef]
Brocks, W., Cornec, A., and Scheider, I., 2003, “Computational Aspects of Nonlinear Fracture Mechanics,” Comprehensive Structural Integrity, 3, pp 129–209. [CrossRef]
Pandolfei, A., and Ortiz, M., 2002, “An Adaptive Procedure for Three-Dimensional Fragmentation Simulations,” Eng. Comp., 18, pp. 148–159. [CrossRef]
Paulino, G. H., Celes, W., Espinha, R., and Zhang, Z., 2007, “A General Topology-Based Framework for Adaptive Insertion of Cohesive Elements in Finite Element Meshes,” Eng. Comp., 24(1), pp. 59–78. [CrossRef]
Turon, A., Davila, C. G., Camanho, P. P., and Costa, J., 2007, “An Engineering Solution for Mesh Size Effects in the Simulation of Delamination Using Cohesive Zone Models,” Eng. Fracture Mech., 74(10), pp. 1665–1682. [CrossRef]
Diehl, T., 2008, “On Using a Penalty-Based Cohesive-Zone Finite Element Approach, Part I: Elastic Solution Benchmarks,” Int. J. Adhesion Adhesives, 28(4–5), pp. 237–255. [CrossRef]
Bazant, Z., 2002, “Scaling of Sea Ice Fracture-Part I: Vertical Penetration,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 69(1), pp. 11–18. [CrossRef]
Yang, Z., and Frank Xu, X., 2008, “A Heterogeneous Cohesive Model for Quasi-Brittle Materials Considering Spatially Varying Random Fracture Properties,” Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng., 197(45–48), pp. 4027–4039. [CrossRef]
Yang, Z., Su, X., Chen, J., and Liu, G., 2009, “Monte Carlo Simulation of Complex Cohesive Fracture in Random Heterogeneous Quasi-Brittle Materials,” Int. J. Solid. Struct., 46(17), pp. 3222–3234. [CrossRef]
Su, X. T., Yang, Z. J., and Liu, G. H., 2010, “Monte Carlo Simulation of Complex Cohesive Fracture in Random Heterogeneous Quasi-Brittle Materials: A 3D Study,” Int. J. Solid. Struct., 47(17), pp. 2336–2345. [CrossRef]
Zhou, F., and Molinari, J., 2004, “Dynamic Crack Propagation with Cohesive Elements: A Methodology to Address Mesh Dependency,” Int. J. Num. Meth. Eng., 59(1), pp. 1–24. [CrossRef]
Kärnä, T., Lubbad, R., Løset, S., Mroz, A., Dalane, O., Bi, X., and Xu, N., 2010, “Ice Failure Process on Fixed and Compliant Cones,” HYDRALAB III Joint User Meeting, Hannover, Germany, pp. 1–4.
Hetényi, M., 1946, Beams on Elastic Foundation, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.
Nevel, D. E., 1961, “The Narrow Free Infinite Wedge on an Elastic Foundation,” Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.
Belytschko, T., Liu, W., and Moran, B., 2000, Nonlinear Finite Elements for Continua and Structures, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, UK.
Shafrova, S., and Moslet, P. O., 2006, “In-Situ Uniaxial Compression Tests of Level Ice: Part I — Ice Strength Variability Versus Length Scale,” ASME 25th Intl. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Hamburg, Germany, June 4–9, Paper No. OMAE2006-92450, pp. 731–739. [CrossRef]
Shafrova, S., and Moslet, P. O., 2006, “In-Situ Uniaxial Compression Tests of Level Ice: Part II—Ice Strength Spatial Distribution,” ASME 25th Intl. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Hamburg, Germany, June 4–9, Paper No. OMAE2006-92451, pp. 741–750. [CrossRef]
Lubbad, R., Moe, G., and Løset, S., 2008, “Static and Dynamic Interaction of Floating Wedge-Shaped Ice Beams and Sloping Structures,” 19th IAHR International Symposium on Ice, Vancouver, Canada, July 6–11, pp. 179–189.
Lu, W., Løset, S., and Lubbad, R., 2012, “Ventilation and Backfill Effect During Ice-Structure Interactions,” The 21st IAHR International Symposium on Ice, Dalian, China, June 11–15, pp. 826–841.
Lu, W., Lubbad, R., Serré, N., and Løset, S., 2013, “A Theoretical Model Investigation of Ice and Wide Sloping Structure Interactions,” 22nd Intl. Conf. on Port and Ocean Eng. Under Arctic Conditions, Espoo, Finland, June 9–13, pp. 1–14.
Lu, W., Lubbad, R., Høyland, K., and Løset, S., 2014, “Physical Model and Theoretical Model Study of Level Ice and Wide Sloping Structure Interactions,” Cold Region. Sci. Tech., 101, pp. 40–72. [CrossRef]
Lubbad, R., and Løset, S., 2011, “A Numerical Model for Real-Time Simulation of Ship-Ice Interaction,” Cold Region. Sci. Tech., 65(2), pp. 111–127. [CrossRef]
Timco, G., 1984, “Model Tests of Ice Forces on a Wide Inclined Structure,” IAHR Ice Symposium II, pp. 87–96.
Paavilainen, J., and Tuhkuri, J., 2013, “Pressure Distributions and Force Chains During Simulated Ice Rubbling against Sloped Structures,” Cold Region. Sci. Tech., 85, pp. 157–174. [CrossRef]
Lewis, J. W., and Edwards, Jr., R. Y., 1969, “Predicting Icebreaking Capabilities of Icebreakers,” US Coast Guard Office of Naval Engineering.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Difference between the shared nodes approach and the currently employed tied surface approach

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Detailed illustration of the cross triangle structured mesh pattern

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Physical model test setup (Note that all the numbers are in model scale with a scaling number of 10. Left: schematic drawing of the cone and load measuring system; right: the actual test setup during the experimentation).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The numerical model setup (note that the numbers given are in full scale)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Fracture energy's spatial distribution with a 0 m correlation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Fracture energy's spatial distribution with a 1 m correlation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Fracture energy's spatial distribution with a 5 m correlation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Bulk energy allocations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Fluid effects in the vertical direction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Illustration of the smeared pressure on the structure surface ((a) initial contact and (b) nonsimultaneous contact during the interaction)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Mises stress in the ice sheet during the initial contact, crack formation, and fragment interactions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Visual illustration of the cohesive element method based simulation (a) the ice rubble accumulation during the interaction and (b) the channel behind the cone structure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

A typical channel shapes behind an ice breaker (reproduced based on Fig. 38 in Ref. [5] but originally from Ref. [60])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Bending failure observation made in (a) numerical simulation and (b) physical model test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Global horizontal load history considering bulk energy dissipation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Mesh dependency of the mean horizontal load

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Illustration of peak load sampling (circle: sampled peak values; dark curve: simulated load history; gray line: mean value of the load history)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

The mean value of the peak horizontal loads

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

(a) Ice breaking patterns and (b) ice breaking length in the radial direction (note here that the radial direction of the ice breaking length is labeled in red color, and the ice thickness in model scale is 33 mm). See online version for color figure.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Comparison of the ice load history

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Mean horizontal load in different integration layers (mesh size: 0.625 m)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Illustration of the cantilever beam bending case study: (a) Original problem and (b) FEM meshing with cohesive elements in between the bulk elements

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

The illustration of structural softening with the presence of intrinsic cohesive elements (note here N = ⌈l/Lm⌉ is an integer number describing the number of cohesive elements and inversely the mesh size)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In