Response to “Comments on the paper by B. E. Grossman‐Ponemon , L. M. Keer, and A. J. Lew ‘A method to compute mixed‐mode stress intensity factors for nonplanar cracks in three dimensions’ ( Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng ., 2020)”
Response to “Comments on the paper by B. E. Grossman‐Ponemon , L. M. Keer, and A. J. Lew ‘A method to compute mixed‐mode stress intensity factors for nonplanar cracks in three dimensions’ ( Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng ., 2020)”
复制标题
对“B. E. Grossman 对论文的评论”—Ponemon、L. M. Keer 和 A. J. Lew“一种计算三维非平面裂纹的混合模式应力强度因子的方法”(Int. J. Numer)
DOI：
10.1002/nme.6695
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Lew, Adrian J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Grossman‐Ponemon, Benjamin E.;Lew, Adrian J.
CA Duarte 对我们的论文 Grossman-Ponemon 等人 [1] 进行了评论，认为我们的工作歪曲了 Gupta 等人的手稿，并导致了错误的结论。争论的根源在于使用“Gupta、Duarte 和 Dhankar 位移相关法”或“GDD-DCM”这个名称来指代我们实施的位移相关法 (DCM) 的特定版本，以便为我们引入的方法提供性能参考。具体来说，该论点指出 DCM 是文献中的标准方法，并且在采用“GDD-DCM”名称来表示我们工作中的结果时，我们正在引导读者得出错误的结论，即 [2] 中使用 G/XFEM 的方法不提供应力强度因子的收敛值。这是不正确的，原因如下： 1． DCM 是一个标签，表示基于共同思想的一系列方法，但该系列中的方法之间存在差异。在我们的工作中，我们实现了 CA Duarte 及其合作者在 [2] 中引入的特定版本的 DCM。该版本的一个新颖之处是第 3.5 节中介绍和描述的平均方案。他们的工作中没有出现过任何其他早期提出的 DCM 方法。因此，它是 CA Duarte 及其合作者的原创贡献。在将我们的实现标记为“GDD-DCM”时，我们特别指的是此类参考文献中介绍的方法。具体而言，[2]中用方程（32）计算应力强度因子与[1]中的方程（3.10）相对应，这是CA Duarte及其合作者在[2]中引入的DCM的独特特征。
CA Duarte commented on our paper Grossman-Ponemon et al.[1], arguing that our work misrepresents and leads to incorrect conclusions about his manuscript, Gupta et al.[2]. The source of the argument is the use of the name “Gupta, Duarte, and Dhankar’s displacement correlation method” or “GDD-DCM” to refer to the particular version of the Displacement Correlation Method (DCM) that we implemented in order to have a reference of performance against the method introduced by us. Specifically, the argument states that the DCM is a standard method in the literature, and that in adopting the name “GDD-DCM” to denote the results in our work we are leading the reader to the incorrect conclusion that the method with G/XFEM in [2] does not provide convergent values for the stress intensity factors. This is incorrect for the following reasons:1. DCM is a label to denote a family of methods based on a common idea, but methods in that family present differences among them. In our work, we implemented a particular version of DCM introduced by CA Duarte and collaborators in [2]. A novel aspect of this version is an averaging scheme introduced and described in § 3.5. 1 of their work which does not appear in any other earlier proposed DCM method. As such, it is an original contribution by CA Duarte and collaborators. In labeling our implementation “GDD-DCM” we are specifically referring to the method introduced in such reference. For concreteness, the computation of stress intensity factors with Eq.(32) in [2] corresponds to Eq.(3.10) in [1], and it is a unique feature of the DCM introduced by CA Duarte and collaborators in [2].