Fracture Mechanics

Fracture mechanics
Nguyen Vinh Phu, PhD

nvinhphu@gmail.com
Researcher at Division of Computational Mechanics
Ton Duc Thang University
Nguyen Vinh Phu
Program Master of Science, Civil Engineering, 2012, Ton Duc Thang University
1
Sunday, September 30,
Textbooks
Anderson, T.L. (1995) Fracture Mechanics: Fundamentals
and Applications, 2nd Edition, CRC Press, USA.
Gdoutos E.E (2005) Fracture Mechanics: an introduction,

2nd Edition, Springer.
Zehnder, T.A. (2007) Lecture Notes on Fracture

Mechanics, Cornel University, Ithaca, New York
imechanica.org
wikipedia
2
Outline
Brief recall on mechanics of materials

- stress/strain curves of metals, concrete
Introduction
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM)
- Energy approach (Grifth, 1921, Orowan and Irwin 1948)
- Stress intensity factors (Irwin, 1960s)
LEFM with small crack tip plasticity

- Irwins model (1960) and strip yield model
- Plastic zone size and shape
Elastic-Plastic Fracture Mechanics

- Crack tip opening displacement (CTOD), Wells 1963
- J-integral (Rice, 1958)
Mixed-mode crack propagation

3
Outline (cont.)
Fatigue
- Paris law
- Overload and crack retardation
- cohesive crack model (Hillerborg, 1976)
- Continuum Damage Mechanics
- size effect (Bazant)
Fracture of concrete
Computational fracture mechanics
- FEM, BEM, MMs
- XFEM
4
Stress-strain curves
Engineering stress and strain
P
e =
, e =
A0
L0
0
0
ductile metals
Tension test
E
Youngs modulus
e = Ee
5
elastic unloading
strain hardening (tai ben)
5
Stress/strain curve
fracture
Wikipedia
necking=decrease of cross-sectional
area due to plastic deformation
1: ultimate tensile strength

6
Stress-strain curves
True stress and true (logarithmic) strain:
dL
P
t = , dt =
A
L
t =
L
L0
L
(extension ratio)
L0
1
L
dL = ln
L
L0
Plastic deformation:volume does not change

L
A
dV = 0 AL = A0 L0
=
L0
A0
Relationship between engineering and true stress/strain
t = e (1 + e ) = e
t = ln(1 + e ) = ln
7
7
Stress-strain curve
concrete
pre-peak post-peak(strain softening)
strain softening=increasing strain while stress decrease

8
Concrete
fracture in concrete
ITZ
aggregates
cement paste
9
Some common material

models
no hardening
ys
Linear elastic
Elastic perfectly plastic
Will be used extensively in Fracture Mechanics

10
10
Strain energy density

Consider a linear elastic bar of stiffness k, length L, area A, subjected to a force F,
the work is
W =
F du =
0
u
0
1 2
1 F
kudu = ku = F u
2
2
u
This work will be completely stored in the structure
in the form of strain energy. Therefore, the external work and strain
energy are equal to one another
In terms of stress/strain
1
U = W = Fu
2
xx
1
1F u
U = Fu =
AL
2
2AL

3
[J/m ]
1
u = x x
2
11
u=
x
x
x dx
11

Poissons ratio
2
2
2
u=
(x + y + z ) (x y + y z
2E
E
1 2
2
2
+z x ) +
(xy + yz
+ zx
)
2
E
=
shear
modulus
2(1 + )
Plane problems
"
1 +1 2
2
2
u=
(x + y ) 2(x y xy )
4
4
3 4 plane strain
Kolosov coefcient
= 3
plane stress
1+
12
12
Indicial notation
a 3D vector
i = 1, 2, 3
||x|| = xi xi
x = {x1 , x2 , x3 }
q
||x|| = x21 + x22 + x23
two times repeated index=sum,

summation/dummy index
||x|| =
xk xk
xx xx + xy xy + yx yx + yy yy
ij ij
xy
x
+
= 0,
x
y
ij,j = 0
y
xy
+
=0
y
x
xx nx + xy ny = tx
i: free index (appears precisely once

in each side of an equation)
yx nx + yy ny = ty
ij nj = ti
:
tensor notation
13
13
Engineering/matrix notation
x1
x = x2
x3
||x|| =
||x|| = x x
Voigt notation
xx
= yy
xy
xx
= yy
2xy
xi xi
ij ij
= ij ij
xx
=
xy
xy
yy
"
xx
=
xy
xy
yy
"
14
14
Principal stresses
Principal direction
2xy
tan 2p =
xx yy
Principal stresses are those stresses that act on principal surface. Principal
surface here means the surface where components of shear-stress is zero.
xx + yy
1 , 2 =
2
xx yy
2
15
2
+ xy
15
Residual stresses
Residual stresses are stresses that remain
after the original cause of the stresses
Wikipedia
(external forces, heat gradient) has been removed.
Residual stresses always appear to some extent during
fabrication operations such as casting, rolling or welding.
Causes
treatment: welding, casting processes, cooling,

Heat
some parts contract more than others -> residual
stresses
16
16
Residual stresses
TOTAL STRESS = APPLIED STRESS + RESIDUAL STRESS
Welding: produces tensile residual stresses -> potential sites for cracks.
Knowledge of residual stresses is indispensable.

Measurement of residual stresses: FEM packages
17
17
Introduction
Cracks: ubiquitous !!!

18
18
Conventional failure analysis

before 1960s
Stresses
Failure criterion
f (, c ) = 0
Solid mechanics,
numerical methods
(FEM,BEM)
Tresca, Mohr-Coulomb
critical stress: c
experimentally determined
: depends on the testing samples !!!
Many catastrophic failures occurred during

Structures: no aws!!!
Liberty ship
cc
WWII: f (, c ) = 0
19
19
New Failure analysis

Stresses
1970s
f (, a, Kc ) = 0
Flaw size a
Fracture
toughness
Fracture Mechanics (FM)

- FM plays a vital role in the design of every critical structural or machine
component in which durability and reliability are important issues (aircraft
components, nuclear pressure vessels, microelectronic devices).
- has also become a valuable tool for material scientists and engineers to guide
their efforts in developing materials with20improved mechanical properties.
20
Design philosophies
Safe life
The component is considered to be free of defects after
fabrication and is designed to remain defect-free during
service and withstand the maximum static or dynamic
working stresses for a certain period of time. If aws, cracks,
or similar damages are visited during service, the component
should be discarded immediately.
Damage tolerance
The component is designed to withstand the maximum static
or dynamic working stresses for a certain period of time
even in presence of aws, cracks, or similar damages of
certain geometry and size.
21
21
Denitions
Crack, Crack growth/propagation
A fracture is the (local) separation
of an
object or material into two, or more, pieces
under the action of stress.
Fracture
mechanics is the eld of

mechanics concerned with the study of
the propagation of cracks in materials. It
uses methods of analytical solid mechanics
to calculate the driving force on a crack
and those of experimental solid mechanics
to characterize the material's resistance to
fracture (Wiki).
22
22
Objectives of FM
What is the residual strength as a function of crack size?

What is the critical crack size?
How long does it take for a crack to grow from a certain
initial size to the critical size?
23
23
Brittle vs Ductile fracture
In brittle fracture, no apparent plastic deformation takes place

before fracture, crack grows very fast!!!, usually strain is smaller
than 5%.
In ductile fracture, extensive plastic deformation takes place

before fracture, crack propagates slowly (stable crack growth).
rough surfaces
24
Ductile fracture is preferable than brittle

failure!!!
24
Classication
Fracture mechanics:
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM)

- brittle-elastic materials: glass, concrete,
ice, ceramic etc.
Elasto-Plastic Fracture Mechanics (EPFM)

- ductile materials: metals, polymer etc.
Nonlinear Fracture Mechanics (NLFM)

25
25
Approaches to fracture
Stress analysis
Energy methods
Computational fracture mechanics
Micromechanisms of fracture (eg. atomic level)
Experiments
Applications of Fracture Mechanics
covered in
the course
26
26
Stress concentration
load lines
Geometry discontinuities: holes, corners, notches, cracks
etc: stress concentrators/risers
27
27
Stress concentration (cont.)

uniaxial
biaxial
28
28
Elliptic hole
Inglis, 1913, theory of elasticity
2b
3 = 1 +
1
a
b2
=
radius of curvature
s !a
b
3 = 1 + 2
1
s
b
!!!
3 = 2
1
0 crack
stress concentration factor [-]
29
2b
3
=1+
KT
1
a
29
Grifths work (brittle materials)

FM was developed during WWI by English aeronautical engineer A. A. Grifth to
explain the following observations:
The stress needed to fracture bulk glass is around 100MPa
experiments on glass bers that Grifth himself conducted: the

fracture stress increases as the ber diameter decreases =>
Hence the uniaxial tensile strength, which had been used
extensively to predict material failure before Griffith, could
not be a specimen-independent material property.
The theoretical stress needed for breaking atomic bonds is

approximately 10,000MPa
Grifth suggested that the low fracture strength observed in

experiments, as well as the size-dependence of strength, was due
to the presence of microscopic aws in the bulk material.
30
30
Grifths size effect experiment

Size effect: nh hng kch thc
the weakness of isotropic solids... is due to the presence of discontinuities or

aws... The effective strength of technical materials could be increased 10 or
20 times at least if these aws could be eliminated.''
31
31
Grifths experiment
Glass bers with articial cracks (much larger
than natural crack-like aws), tension tests
3 = 2
b
1
const
c =
a
c a = const
Energy approach
32
32
Energy balance during

crack growth
external work
kinetic energy
= U e + U p + U k + U
W
surface energy
internal strain energy
All changes with respect to time are caused by changes in

crack size:
()
() a
=
t
a t
Energy equation is rewritten:
Ue
Up
U
W
=
+
+
slow
process
a
a
a
a
It indicates that the work rate supplied to the continuum by the applied loads is equal
to the rate of the elastic strain energy and plastic strain work plus the energy
dissipated in crack propagation
33
33
Potential energy
= Ue W
Up
U
=
+
a
a
a
Brittle materials: no plastic deformation

U
a
a
Grifths through-thickness crack
s is energy required to form a unit of new surface
= 2s
[J/m2=N/m]
Inglis solution
2
=
a
E
c a =
2 a
= 2s c =
E
(plane stress, constant load)

(two new material surfaces)
2Es
1/2
2Es
a
34
34
[N/m2]
a
= 2s c =
E
2Es
a
[N/m2]
E : MPa=N/m2
check dimension
s : N/m
a: m
App. of
dimensional analysis
1
1 2
u = =
2
2E
r
Dimensional
Analysis
2
a
2Es
= 2s c =
E
a
B=1
35
2 2
U = a
E
35
[N/m2]
a
= 2s c =
E
2Es
a
[N/m2]
E : MPa=N/m2
check dimension
s : N/m
a: m
r
Dimensional
Analysis
2
a
2Es
= 2s c =
E
a
App. of
dimensional analysis
1
1 2
u = =
2
2E
2 2
U = a
E
B=1
35
35
Energy equation for

ductile
materials
Plane stress
r
r
2E
ss
2E
cc =
=
a
a
c =
p
2E(s + p )
a
Grifth (1921), ideally brittle solids
Irwin, Orowan (1948), metals
plastic work per unit area of surface created
p ! s
p 103 s (metals)
Grifths work was ignored for almost 20 years
36
36
Energy release rate

Irwin 1956
d
G
dA
G: energy released during fracture per unit of newly

created fracture surface area
G = 2 + p
| {z }
the resistance of the material

that must be overcome for
crack growth
energy available for crack growth (crack driving force)

Energy release rate failure criterion
Gc
G Gc
fracture energy, considered to be a material property (independent of the

applied loads and the geometry of the body).
37
37
Energy release rate

Irwin 1956
d
G
dA
Grifth
G: energy released during fracture per unit of newly

created fracture surface area
G = 2 + p
| {z }
the resistance of the material

that must be overcome for
crack growth
energy available for crack growth (crack driving force)

Energy release rate failure criterion
Gc
G Gc
fracture energy, considered to be a material property (independent of the

applied loads and the geometry of the body).
37
37
G from experiment
a1: OA, triangle OAC=U
a2: OB, triangle OBC=U
Fixed grips
d
G
dA
Dead loads
1 (OAB)
G=
B a
B: thickness
= Ue W
OAB=ABCD-(OBD-OAC)
1 (OAB)
G=
B a
W =0
Ue < 0
elastic strain energy stored in the body is decreasingis

38
being released
38
G from experiments
1 shaded area
G=
B a4 a3 39
39
Crack extension resistance

Irwin
crack driving
curve
(R-curve)
force curve
dU
dU
d
G=
dA
dA
dUp
dU
+
R
dA
dA
dA
G=R
R-curve
Resistance to fracture increases with growing

crack size in elastic-plastic materials.
R = R(a)
Irwin
Stable crack growth: fracture

resistance of thin specimens
is represented by a curve not
a single parameter.
SLOW
40
40
R-curve shapes
2
a
at R-curve
G=
E
(ideally brittle materials)
rising R-curve
(ductile metals)
slope
dR
dG
G = R,
da
da
stable crack growth

41
crack grows then stops,

only grows further if
there is an increase of
applied load
41
G in terms of compliance
P
u
C=
P
inverse of stiffness
K
Fixed grips
P
dP
dUe = Ue (a + da) Ue (a)

1
1
= (P + dP )u P u
2
2
1
= dP u
2
1 dP
G=
u
2B da
2
1 u dC
1 2 dC
G=
=
P
2
2B C da
2B
da
a
a + da
u
dA = Bda
42
dW dUe
G=
dA
42
P
u
C=
P
inverse of stiffness
Fixed load
1
1
dUe = P (u + du) P u
2
2
1
= P du
2
a + da
P
a
dW = P du
du
1 du
G=
P
2B da
1 2 dC
P
G=
2B
da
43
dW dUe
G=
dA
43
Fixed grips
Fixed loads
1 u2 dC
1 2 dC
G=
=
P
2B C 2 da
2B
da
1 2 dC
G=
P
2B
da
Strain energy release rate is identical for xed grips and

xed loads.
Strain energy release rate is proportional to the
differentiation of the compliance with respect to the crack
length.
44
44
Stress analysis of
isotropic linear elastic
cracked solids
45
45
Airy stress function for

solving 2D linear elasticity problems
x
xy
+
= 0,
x
y
Equilibrium:
Airy stress
function :
Compatibility
condition:

x =
,
2
y
y
xy
+
=0
y
x
2

y =
,
2
x
xy

=
xy

r =
+2 2 2 +
=0
4
4
x
x y
y
4
(*)
Bi-harmonic equation
For a given problem, choose an appropriate that
satises (*) and the boundary conditions.
ij ij ui
46
46
Crack modes
ar
47
47
Crack modes
48
48
Westergaards complex
1937
stress function for mode I
2
Z(z), z = x + iy, i = 1
= ReZ + yImZ
Z
Z
Z = Z(z)dz, Z = Z(z)dz
Kolosov
coef.
3 4
= 3
1+
plane strain
plane stress
E
=
shear
modulus
2(1 + )
49
xx = ReZ yImZ 0
yy = ReZ + yImZ
xy = yReZ 0
ij ui
1
2u =
ReZ yImZ
2
+1
2v =
ImZ yReZ
2
49
Grifths crack (mode I)

(x, y) : xx = yy = , xy = 0
|x| < a, y = 0 : yy = xy = 0
boundary conditions
z
Z(z) =
z 2 a2
xx = ReZ yImZ 0
1I
yy = ReZ + yImZ 0
xy = yReZ 0
y = 0, |x| < a
x
Z(z) =
i
is
imaginary
=
x2 za2a, = re
(
+
a)
I a Z(z) = p
2
Z=
a
0
Z(z) = p
(
+
2a)
Z
(z)
=
0
2
2
1 (a/z)
(z 2 a2 )3/2
innite plate
(x, y) : z Z
50
50

(x, y) : xx = yy = , xy = 0
|x| < a, y = 0 : yy = xy = 0
boundary conditions
z
Z(z) =
z 2 a2
y
= z a, = re
( + a)
Z(z) = p
( + 2a)
a
Z=
2
innite plate
51
51

(x, y) : xx = yy = , xy = 0
( + a)
( + a)
p
p
Z(z)
=
=
|x| < a, y (
= 0+: 2a)
yy = xy2a(1
= 0 + /(2a)))
1 + /(2a)) = (1 + /(2a))
1/2
1
=1
+ H.O.T
2 2a
=1
small
small
+a=a
a
Z =
a
2
Z=
2
small
52
52

KI
Z(z) =
, KI = a
2
KI i/2
i
Z(z) =
e
= re
2r
Recall
xx = ReZ yImZ
yy = ReZ + yImZ 0
xy = yReZ
1 KI 3/2
KI
i3/2
ix
Z (z) =
=
e
e
= cos x i sin x
2 2
2r 2r
y
=
r
sin
Crack tip stress eld
sin = 2 sin cos

2
2
KI
3
xx =
cos
1 sin cos
2
2
2
2r
inverse square root

KI
3
yy =
cos
1 + sin cos
2
2
2
2r
3
KI
xy =
sin cos sin
2
2
2
2r
r 0 : ij
53
0
53

KI
Z(z) =
, KI = a
2
KI i/2
i
Z(z) =
e
= re
2r
Recall
xx = ReZ yImZ
yy = ReZ + yImZ 0
xy = yReZ
1 KI 3/2
KI
i3/2
ix
Z (z) =
=
e
e
= cos x i sin x
2 2
2r 2r
y
=
r
sin
Crack tip stress eld
sin = 2 sin cos

2
2
KI
3
xx =
cos
1 sin cos
2
2
2
2r
inverse square root

KI
3
yy =
cos
1 + sin cos
2
2
2
2r
singularity
3
KI
xy =
sin cos sin
2
2
2
2r
r 0 : ij
53
0
53
Plane strain problems

Hookes law
zz
1
= (xx yy + zz )
E
Plane strain zz = 0
KI
3
xx =
cos
1 sin cos
2
2
2
2r
KI
3
yy =
cos
1 + sin cos
2
2
2
2r
3
KI
sin cos sin
xy =
2
2
2
2r
z = (x + y )
KI
z = 2
cos
2r
2
54
54
Stresses on the crack plane
KI
3
xx =
1 sin cos
cos
2
2
2
2r
KI
3
yy =
1 + sin cos
cos
2
2
2
2r
3
KI
sin cos sin
xy =
2
2
2
2r
On the crack plane

= 0, r = x
xx = yy
KI
=
2x
crack plane is a principal plane

with the following principal
stresses
xy = 0
55
1 = 2 = xx = yy
55
Stress Intensity Factor (SIF)

xx
yy
xy
KI
3
K
=
a
I
=
cos
1 sin cos
2
2
2
2r
KI
3
=
cos
1 + sin cos
2
2
2
2r
3
KI
[MPa m]
=
sin cos sin
2
2
2
2r
KI
SIMILITUDE
Stresses-K: linearly proportional

K uniquely denes the crack tip stress eld
modes I, II and III: K , K , K
LEFM: single-parameter
I
II
III
56
56
Singular dominated zone

yy
KI
=
cos
2
2r
3
1 + sin cos
2
2
(crack plane)
crack tip
KI
3
xx =
cos
1 sin cos
2
2
2
2r
KI
3
yy =
cos
1 + sin cos
2
2
2
2r
3
KI
sin cos sin
xy =
2
2
2
2r
K-dominated zone
57
57
Mode I: displacement eld

KI
Z(z) =
2r
cos i sin
2
2
Z
Z = Z(z)dz
Recall
1
2u =
ReZ yImZ
2
KI
+1
Z(z) =
yReZ
2v
=
Im
Z
2
2
r
K
r
I
1/2
Z(z)
= 2
= 2KI
cos + i sin
z =+a
2
2
2
2
i
= re
Displacement eld
ix
e
= cos x i sin x
r
KI
r
2
u=
cos
1 + 2 sin
2 2
2
2
r
KI
r
2
v=
sin
+ 1 2 cos
2 2
2
2
58
58
Crack face displacement

y = 0, a x a
+1
2v =
ImZ yReZ
2
x
Z(z) =
x 2 a2
a x a
i = 1
+1 p 2
v=
a x2
4
+1
v=
ImZ
4
p
Z(z)
= x 2 a2
Z(z)
= i(
a2 x 2 )
ellipse
Crack Opening Displacement

+1 p 2
COD = 2v =
a x2
59
2
59
Crack tip stress eld in

polar coordinates-mode I
KI
ij = fij ()
a
rr
KI
=
2r
5
1
3
cos cos
4
2 4
2
KI
3
1
3
=
cos + cos
2 4
2
2r 4
KI
1
1
3
r =
sin + sin
2 4
2
2r 4
stress transformation
60
60
Principal crack
tip
stresses
s
xx + yy
1 , 2 =
KI
1 =
cos
1 + sin
2
2
2r
KI
2 =
cos
1 sin
2
2
2r
0
plane stress
3 = 2KI
cos
plane strain
2
2r
61
xx yy
2
2
+ xy
KI
3
xx =
cos
1 sin cos
2
2
2
2r
KI
3
yy =
cos
1 + sin cos
2
2
2
2r
3
KI
sin cos sin
xy =
2
2
2
2r
3 = (1 + 2 )
61
Mode II problem
Boundary conditions
(x, y) : xx = yy = 0, xy =
|x| < a, y = 0 : yy = xy = 0
Stress function
Check BCs
i z
Z =
z 2 a2
xx = ReZ yImZ 0
yy = ReZ + yImZ 0
xy = yReZ 0
62
62
Mode II problem
Boundary conditions
(x, y) : xx = yy = 0, xy =
|x| < a, y = 0 : yy = xy = 0
Stress function
xx
yy
xy
mode II SIF
i z
Z =
z 2 a2
KII
3
=
sin
2 + cos cos
2
2
2
2r
3
KII
=
sin cos cos
2
2
2
2r
KII
3
=
cos
1 sin sin
2
2
2
2r
K
63 II
= a
63
Mode II problem (cont.)

izxx = yy = 0, xy =
(x,
y)
:
Z =
Stress function
2 a2
z
|x| < a, y = 0 : yy = xy = 0
(x, y) : xx = yy = 0, xy =
i z
Z =
|x| < a, y = 0 : yy = xy = 0
z 2 a2
KII
u=
2
+ 1 + 2 cos
2
r
KII
r
2
v=
cos
1 2 sin
2
2
2
2
mode II SIF
KII
sin
2
2
= a
64
64
Mode III problem
65
65
Universal nature of the

asymptotic stress eld
Westergaards, Sneddon etc.
KII
3
KI
3
xx =
sin
2 + cos cos
xx =
1 sin cos
cos
2
2
2
2r
2
2
2
2r
3
KII
KI
3
yy =
sin cos cos
yy =
1 + sin cos
cos
2
2
2
2r
2
2
2
2r
KII
3
KI
xy =
cos
1 sin sin
sin cos sin
xy =
2
2
2
2r
2
2
2
2r
(mode I)
Irwin
(mode II)
K
ij =
fij () + H.O.T
2r
66
66
Inclined crack in tension
1 = x cos + 2 sin cos xy + sin y

2 = y cos2 2 sin cos xy + sin2 x
12 = x cos sin + cos 2xy + 0.5 sin 2y
Final result
1 = (sin2 )
2
2 = (cos )
12 = (sin cos )
Recall
+
KI = y a
KII = xy a
KI = a cos2
KII = a sin cos
67
67
Inclined crack in tension

2
1 = x cos + 2 sin cos xy + sin y

2 = y cos2 2 sin cos xy + sin2 x
12 = x cos sin + cos 2xy + 0.5 sin 2y
Final result
1 = (sin2 )
2
2 = (cos )
12 = (sin cos )
Recall
+
KI = y a
KII = xy a
KI = a cos2
KII = a sin cos
67
67
Cylindrical pressure vessel with an inclined

through-thickness crack
closed-ends
pR
z =
2t
pR
=
t
R
10 thin-walled pressure
t
2
(R )p = (2Rt)z
(l2R)p = (2lt)
pR
2
KI =
a(1 + sin )
2t
pR
KII =
a sin cos
68
2t
68
Cylindrical pressure vessel with an inclined

through-thickness crack
= 2z
This is why an overcooked hotdog usually
cracks along the longitudinal direction first
(i.e. its skin fails from hoop stress, generated
by internal steam pressure).
Equilibrium
pR
z =
2t
pR
=
t
pR
2
KI =
a(1 + sin )
2t
pR
KII =
a sin cos
69
2t
?
69
Computation of SIFs
Analytical methods (limitation: simple geometry)
- superposition methods
- weight/Green functions
Numerical methods (FEM, BEM, XFEM)

numerical solutions -> data t -> SIF
handbooks
Experimental methods
- photoelasticity
70
70
SIF for nite size samples

Exact (closed-form) solution for SIFs: simple crack
geometries in an innite plate.
Cracks in nite plate: inuence of external boundaries

cannot be neglected -> generally, no exact solution
71
71
SIF for nite size samples

KI
<
KI
dimensional
analysis
geometry/correction
K
=
f
(a/W
)
a
I
factor [-]
force lines are compressed->>

higher stress concentration
a W : f (a/W ) 1
72
72
SIFs handbook
73
73
SIFs handbook
74
74
SIFs handbook
75
75
Reference stress
KI = a
KI = max max a
KI = xa xa a
xa
max
max
= max
=
xa
1 2a/W
Non-uniform stress distribution

for which reference stress!!!
76
76
Reference stress
KI = a
KI = max max a
KI = xa xa a
chosen
xa
max
max
= max
=
xa
1 2a/W
Non-uniform stress distribution

for which reference stress!!!
76
76
Superposition method
A sample in mode I subjected to tension and bending:
KItension
ij =
ij =
2r
KItension
KI =
fij () +
bending
KI
fij ()
2r
bending
KI
2r
tension
KI
fij ()
bending
KI
Is superposition of SIFs of different crack modes

possible?
77
77
Determine the stress intensity factor for an edge cracked

plate subjected to a combined tension and bending.
a/W = 0.2
B
thickness
Solution
bend
KI
6M
= fM (a/W )
a
2
BW
ten
KI
P
= fP (a/W )
a
BW
1.12
6M
P
KI = 1.055
+
1.12
a
BW 2
BW
1.055
78
78
Superposition method
Centered crack under internal pressure
KId + KIe = KIb = 0 KIe = KId
= a
This result is useful for surface aws along the

internal wall of pressure vessels.
79
79

KI = a
80
80
SIFs: asymmetric loadings

Procedure: build up the case from symmetric
cases and then to subtract the superuous
loadings.
K A = KB + K C K D
KA = (KB + KC )/2
81
81
Two small cracks at a hole
edge crack
hole as a part of the crack
82
82
Photoelasticity
Wikipedia
Photoelasticity is an experimental method to determine the stress distribution in a material.
The method is mostly used in cases where mathematical methods become quite cumbersome.
Unlike the analytical methods of stress determination, photoelasticity gives a fairly accurate
picture of stress distribution, even around abrupt discontinuities in a material. The method is an
important tool for determining critical stress points in a material, and is used for determining
stress concentration in irregular geometries.
83
83
K-G relationship
So far, two parameters that describe the
behavior of cracks: K and G.
K: local behavior (tip stresses)
G: global behavior (energy)
Irwin: for linear elastic materials, these two params are
uniquely related
Crack closure analysis: work
to open the crack = work to close
the crack
84
84
Irwin
K-G relationship
B=1 (unit thickness)
G = lim
a0
U
a
fixed load
Z a
work of crack closure U =
dU (x)
1
dU (x) = 2 yy (x)uy (x)dx
2
r
( + 1)KI (a + a) a=x
uy =
2
2
KI (a)
yy =
=0
2x
KI (a)
r
Z
a
2
( + 1)KI2
( + 1)KI
a x
G=
G = lim
dx
a0 4a
8
85x
0
85
K-G relationship (cont.)

Mode I
2
K
I
E
GI =
2
(1 v 2 ) KI
E
plane stress
plane strain
Mixed mode
2
2
KI2
KII
KIII
G= 0 + 0 +
E
E
2
Equivalence of the strain energy release rate and SIF approach

Mixed mode: G is scalar => mode contributions are additive
Assumption: self-similar crack growth!!!
Self-similar crack growth: planar crack remains planar ( da same

86
direction as a )
86
SIF in terms of compliance

1 2 dC
G=
P
2B
da
KI2
GI = 0
E
B: thickness
0 2
E
P dC
2
KI =
2B da
A series of specimens with different crack lengths: measure the

compliance C for each specimen -> dC/da -> K and G
87
87
SIF in terms of compliance

1 2 dC
G=
P
2B
da
KI2
GI = 0
E
B: thickness
0 2
E
P dC
2
KI =
2B da
A series of specimens with different crack lengths: measure the

compliance C for each specimen -> dC/da -> K and G
87
87
Units
88
88
Example
89
89
1 OAi Aj
G=
2B aj ai
Gc for different crack lengths are almost the same: at Rcurve.

90
90
91
91
92
92
Examples
a increases -> G increase
1 2 dC
load control
P
G=
2B
da
1 u2 dC
disp. control
G=
2B C 2 da
load control
3u Eh
G=
16a4
a increases -> G decreases!!!
Double cantilever beam (DCB)

93
93
Compliance-SIF
r
a
K = sec
a
W
2
2
P dC
P dC
G=
=
2 dA
4B da
K2
G=
E
2
a 2
W a
sec
P dC
=
4B da
E
sec
dC
=
da
C=
a
0
a
4
a
sec
da
+
C
0
2
EBW
W
H
C0 =
=
P
EBW
a 2
W a4B
P 2E
4
a
dC
=
a sec
2
da
EBW
W
4
C=
ln cos
EB
W
94
H
+
EBW
94
4W
C/C0 =
ln cos
H
W
+1
compliance rapidly increases
95
95
K as a failure criterion
Failure criterion
K = Kc
f (a/W ) a = Kc
fracture toughness
Problem 1: given crack length a, compute the
maximum allowable applied stress
W, Kc
max
Kc
=
f (a/W ) a
the
Problem 2: for a specic applied stress, compute
maximum permissible crack length (critical crack
length) ac
f (ac /W ) ac = Kc ac
Problem 3: compute K
provided crack length and
stress at fracture Kc = f (ac /W ) ac
96
96
Example
97
97
Example solution
KI = 1.12 a
a
KI = KIc /S
pR
z =
2t
pR
=
t
problem 1
problem 2
p = 12MPa
a = 1mm
98
98
Example
Grifth
c =
Irwin
2Es
a
KIc
c =
=479
Mpa
a
=5.8 Mpa
99
99
Mixed-mode fracture
KI = KIc
KIc < KIIc , KIIIc
KII = KIIc
KIII = KIIIc
lowest Kc: safe
Superposition cannot be applied to SIF.

However, energy can.
2
KI2
KII
G= 0 + 0
E
E
2
KIc
Gc = 0
E
Fracture occurs when

G = Gc
2
KI
2
KII
2
KIc
100
100
Experiment verication of the

mixed-mode failure criterion
2
KI
2
KII
2
KIc
a circle in
KI, KII plane
Data points do not fall exactly on the circle.

2
2
KI
KII
( + 1)KI2
+
=1
G=
KIc
KIIc
self-similar
growth
101
8
101
G: crack driving force -> crack will grow in the

direction that G is maximum
102
102
Crack tip plasticity

Irwins model
Strip Yield model
Plane stress vs plane strain
Plastic zone shape
103
103
Introduction
Grifth's theory provides excellent agreement with experimental data for

brittle materials such as glass. For ductile materials such as steel, the surface
energy () predicted by Grifth's theory is usually unrealistically high. A
group working under G. R. Irwin at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory
(NRL) during World War II realized that plasticity must play a signicant role
in the fracture of ductile materials.
(SSY)
Small-scale yielding:
LEFM still applies with
minor modications done
by G. R. Irwin
crack tip
RD
104
104
Validity of K in presence of a
plastic zone
crack tip
Fracture process usually occurs in

the inelastic region not the Kdominant zone.
is SIF a valid failure criterion for materials that

exhibit inelastic deformation at the tip
105
105
Validity of K in presence of
a plastic zone
[Anderson]
same K->same stresses applied on the disk
stress elds in the plastic zone: the same
K still uniquely characterizes the crack tip
conditions in the presence of a small
plastic zone.
LEFM solution
106
106
Paradox of a sharp crack

At crack tip:
r = 0 ij =
An innitely sharp crack is merely a mathematical

abstraction.
Crack tip stresses are nite because (i) crack tip
radius is nite (materials are made of atoms) and (ii)
plastic deformation makes the crack blunt.
107
107
Plastic correction
A cracked body in a plane stress condition
Material: elastic perfectly plastic with yield stress
ys
On the crack plane
=0
stress singularity is truncated by

yielding at crack tip
KI
yy =
2r
yy = ys (yield occurs)
ys
KI2
r1 =
2
2ys
rst order approximation of plastic zone size: equilibrium

is not satised
108
108
Irwins plastic correction
109
109
plate behaves as with a longer crack

stress redistribution: yellow
area=hatched area
ys r1 =
r1
yy dr
0
KI2
rp = 2r1 =
2
ys
1
rp =
3
KI2
2
ys
plastic zone: a CIRCLE !!!

Plane strain
110
110
Plane stress
Plane strain
1 = 2 = yy , 3 = 0
1 = 2 = yy
3 = (xx + yy ) = 2yy
3 = 0.66yy
1 = ys
y = ys
Trescas criterion
= 0.33
1 3 = ys
y = 3ys
111
111

crack tip
LEFM:
RD
ys r1 =
rp is small
r1
yy dr
0
1
rp =
3
2
KI
2
ys
ys is big and KIc is small
LEFM is better applicable to materials of high yield

strength and low fracture toughness
112
112
Plastic zone shape

von-Mises criterion
e = ys
"
1 !
2
2
2 1/2
e = (1 2 ) + (1 3 ) + (2 3 )
2
Mode I, principal stresses
KI
1 =
cos
1 + sin
2
2
2r
KI
2 =
cos
1 sin
2
2
2r
0
plane stress
3 = 2KI
cos
plane strain
2
2r
KI
ys
KI
ys
1
ry () =
4
1
ry () =
4
3
1 + cos + sin2
2
plane stress
3
2
(1 2) (1 + cos ) + sin
113
2
2
$
113
Plastic zone shape

plastic zone shape (mode I, von-Mises criterion)
1
ry () =
4
0.6
rp/(KI/(N y))2
0.4
KI
ys
3
2
1 + cos + sin
2
plane stress
plane strain
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.60.40.2 0 0.2 0.4
2 0.6 0.8
rp/(KI/(N y))
114
114
Plane stress/plane strain

constrained by the
surrounding material
dog-bone shape
Plane stress failure: in general, ductile

Plane strain failure: in general, brittle
115
115
Plane stress/plane strain

toughness depends on thickness
Plane strain fracture toughnessKIc

lowest K (safe)
# !1/2
Kc = KIc
1.4 KIc
1+ 2
B
ys
(Irwin)
116
116
Fracture toughness tests

Prediction of failure in real-world applications: need
the value of fracture toughness
Tests on cracked samples: PLANE STRAIN condition!!!

Compact
Tension Test
2
3
4
a
a
a
a
a
2+
0.886 + 4.64
13.32
+ 14.72(
5.6
P
W
W
W
W
W
KI =
3/2
a
B W
1
W
ASTM (based on
Irwins model)
Constraint
conditions
117
117
Compact tension test

Cyclic loading: introduce a crack ahead of the notch
Stop cyclic load, apply forces P
Monitor maximum load and CMOD until failure (can sustain no
further increase of load)
P Q KQ
check constraint
conditions
KIc = KQ
118
118
Fracture toughness test

ASTM E399
plane strain
25
B > 25rp =
3
KI
ys
a > 25rp
Linear fracture mechanics is only useful when the plastic

zone size is much smaller than the crack size
Text
119
119
Strip Yield Model

proposed by Dugdale and Barrenblatt
Innite plate with though thickness crack 2a
Plane stress condition

Elastic perfectly plastic material
Hypotheses:
All plastic deformation concentrates in a line in front of

the crack.
The crack has an effective length which exceeds that of

the physical crack by the length of the plastic zone.
: chosen such that stress singularity at the tip

disappears.
120
120
Strip Yield Model (cont.)

Superposition principle
KI =
ys
KI
ys
KI
ys
KI = (a + c)
r
a+c
a
ys
1
KI = 2ys
cos
a+c
ys
(derivation
follows)
K
1 2
ij =
fij () + H.O.T
cos x = 1 x +
2r
2!
a
= cos
KI = 0
a+c
2ys
Irwins result 0.318
2 2
2
a
KI
close
to
1
K
I
c=
=
r
=
2
p
8ys
8 ys
ys
0.392
121
121
SIF for plate with

normal force at crack
P = ys dx
P
KA =
a
Z c r
a+x
ys
cx
c+x
ys
dx
+
a x KI =
c
+
x
c
x
c
a
r
P
ax
KB =
r
a a + x
a+c
a
ys
1
cos
KI = 2ys
a+c
Gdoutos, chapter 2, p40
122
122
Effective crack length
1
r1 =
2
KI
ys
rp =
8
KI
ys
123
123
Fracture vs. Plastic collapse

net
P
W
=
=
W a
W a
P
=
W
(cracked section)
W
= ys
Yield:
W a
= ys
unit thickness
a
1
W
short crack: fracture by plastic collapse!!!

high toughness materials:yielding
before fracture
W
P
124
124
Fracture vs. Plastic collapse

net
P
W
=
=
W a
W a
P
=
W
(cracked section)
W
= ys
Yield:
W a
= ys
unit thickness
a
1
W
short crack: fracture by plastic collapse!!!

high toughness materials:yielding
before fracture
W
P
LEFM applies when c 0.66ys

124
124
Example
Consider an innite plate with a central crack of length 2a
subjected to a uniaxial stress perpendicular to the crack
plane. Using the Irwins model for a plane stress case, show
that the effective SIF is given as follows
Keff
a
=
2 $1/2
1 0.5 ys
Solution:
The effective crack length is a + r1
p
Keff = (a + r1 )
The effective SIF is thus
with
125
2
Keff
r1 =
2
2ys
125
Example
1. Calculate the fracture toughness of a material for which a plate
test with a central crack gives the following information: W=20in,
B=0.75in, 2a=2in, failure load P=300kip. The yield strength is 70ksi. Is
this plane strain? Check for collapse. How large is the plastic zone
at the time of fracture?
2. Using the result of problem 1, calculate the residual strength of a
plate with an edge crack W=5 inch, a=2inch.
3. In a toughness test on a center cracked plate one obtains the
following result: W=6in, B=0.2in, 2a=2in, Pmax=41kips, ys = 50 ksi.
Calculate the toughness. How large is the plastic zone at fracture? Is
the calculated toughness indeed the true toughness?
126
126
Solution to problem 1
Stress at failure f = 300/(20 0.75) = 20 ksi
Toughness
Kc = 1 20 1 = 35.4 ksi in
a
Nominal stress at collapse
= ys 1
W
20 2
col = 70
= 63 ksi
20
f < col
Fracture occurs before collapse.

B 2.5
KIc
Y
= 0.64in plane strain by ASTM
127
f r
Kc
=
a
f r
35.4
=
= 6.73 ksi
2.1 2
col
52
= 70
= 42 ksi
5
Residual strength 6.73 ksi
128
Stress at failure f = 41/(6 0.2) = 34.2 ksi
Toughness
Kc = 1.07 34.2

col
62
= 50
= 33.3 ksi
6
f > col
1 = 64.9 ksi in
a
= ys 1
W
= 1.067 = 1.07
Collapse occurs before

fracture
The above Kc is not the

toughness!!!
129
129
Stress at failure f = 41/(6 0.2) = 34.2 ksi
Toughness
Kc = 1.07 34.2

col
62
= 50
= 33.3 ksi
6
f > col
1 = 64.9 ksi in
a
= ys 1
W
= 1.067 = 1.07
Collapse occurs before

fracture
The above Kc is not the

toughness!!!
whole section is yielding

129
129
Elastic-Plastic
Fracture Mechanics
J-integral (Rice,1958)
Crack Tip Opening Displacement (CTOD), (Wells,
1963)
130
130
Introduction
No unloading
Monotonic loading: an elastic-plastic mater

is equivalent to a nonlinear elastic material
deformation theory of plasticity

can be utilized
- deformation theory
plasticity models:
131
- ow theory
131
J-integral
Wikipedia
Eshelby, Cherepanov, 1967, Rice, 1968
ui
J=
W n1 ti
d
x1
"
Z Z
N
ui ui
J =J = W dxW
t2i ti ds ds
2 dx
m
x1 x1
Z
W =
ij dij strain energy density
0
ti = ij nj
surface traction
J integral
(1) J=0 for a closed path

(2) is path-independent
notch:traction-free
132
132
Path independence of
J-integral
J is zero over a closed path
0 = JABCDA = JAB + JBC + JCD + JDA
Z
ui
J=
W dx2 ti
ds
x1
AB, CD: traction-free crack faces

ti = 0, dx2 = 0
(crack faces: parallel to x-axis)
JAB = JCD = 0
JBC + JDA = 0
which path BC or AD should be used to

compute J?
JBC = JAD
133
133
=
d
=
da
J-integral
A0
A0
dW
dA
da
W dA
crack grows, coord. axis move
d
=
da
a x
ti ui ds
dui
ti
ds
da
Self-similar crack growth

d
=
da
A0
W
W
a
x
@W @ij
@W
=
@a
@ij @a
@ij
1 @
=
@a
2 @a
dA
ti
ui
ui
a
x
ds
@W
= ij
@ij
@ui
@uj
+
@xj
@xi
nonlinear
elastic
134
x
d
=
+
da
a x a
x
= 1
a
134
W
1
= ij
a
2 a
J-integral
A:B=0
symmetric
ui
uj
+
xj
xi
ui
ui
W
= ij
= ij
a
a xj
xj a
Z
Z
ui
ui
ij
dA =
ij nj
ds
xj a
a
A0
A0
W
dA =
a
skew-symmetric
ui
ti
ds
a
Gauss theorem
d
=
da
W
ui
dA + ti
ds
x
A0 x
Z
d
ui
W dy ti
=
ds
da
x
nx ds = dy
135
135
W
1
= ij
a
2 a
J-integral
A:B=0
symmetric
ui
uj
+
xj
xi
ui
ui
W
= ij
= ij
a
a xj
xj a
Z
Z
ui
ui
ij
dA =
ij nj
ds
xj a
a
A0
A0
W
dA =
a
skew-symmetric
ui
ti
ds
a
Gauss theorem
d
=
da
W
ui Gauss theorem, nnxxds
=
dy
ds
=
dy
dA + ti
ds
x
A0 x
Z
d
ui
W dy ti
=
ds
da
x
135
135
W
1
= ij
a
2 a
J-integral
A:B=0
symmetric
ui
uj
+
xj
xi
ui
ui
W
= ij
= ij
a
a xj
xj a
Z
Z
ui
ui
ij
dA =
ij nj
ds
xj a
a
A0
A0
W
dA =
a
skew-symmetric
ui
ti
ds
a
Gauss theorem
d
=
da
W
ui Gauss theorem, nnxxds
=
dy
ds
=
dy
dA + ti
ds
x
A0 x
J-integral is equivalent to the

J
Z
energy
release
rate
for
a
d
ui
nonlinear elastic material under
W dy ti
=
ds
da
x
quasi-static condition.
135
135
J-K relationship
2
2
KI2
KII
KIII
G= 0 + 0 +
E
E
2
=
da
ui
W dy ti
ds
x
(previous slide)
2
2
KI2
KII
KIII
J= 0 + 0 +
E
E
2
J-integral: very useful in numerical computation of SIFs

136
136
Crack Tip Opening

Displacement
+1 p 2
v=
a x2
4
see slide 59
COD is zero at the crack tips.

137
Crack Tip Opening

Displacement
Wells 1961
see slide 43
COD is taken as the separation of the faces of the effective crack at the tip of the physical crack
+1
ry
uy =
KI
2
2
2
1
KI
ry =
2 ys
3
=
1+
E
2 =
1+
(Irwins plastic correction, plane stress)

CTOD
4 KI2
= 2uy =
ys E
138
138
CTOD-G-K relation
Wells observed:
The degree of crack blunting increases

in proportion to the toughness
of the material
4 KI2
=
ys E
KI2
GI =
E
Fracture occurs
GI = ys
4
= c
material property
independent of specimen
and crack length
(conrmed by
experiments)
Under conditions of SSY, the fracture

criteria based on the stress intensity factor,
the strain energy release rate and the
crack tip opening displacement are
equivalent.
139
139
CTOD in design
4 KI2
= 2uy =
ys E
has no practical application
140
140
CTOD experimental
determination
Plastic hinge
rigid
similarity of triangles
rotational factor [-], between 0 and 1

141
141
Governing fracture mechanism

and fracture toughness
142
142
Example
143
143
Example
2a = 25.2cm
144
144
Fatigue crack growth

S-N curve
Constant amplitude cyclic load
- Paris law
Variable amplitude cyclic load

- Crack retardation due to overload
145
145
Fatigue
Fatigue occurs when a material is subjected to repeated loading and unloading (cyclic loading).
ASTM denes fatigue life, Nf, as the number of stress cycles of a specied character that a
specimen sustains before failure of a specied nature occurs.
Under cyclic loadings, materials can fail (due to fatigue) at stress levels well below their
strength -> fatigue failure.
blunting
resharpening
146
146
Cyclic loadings
max = min
= max min
a = 0.5(max min )
m = 0.5(max + min )
min
R=
max
load ratio
147
147
Cyclic vs. static loadings

Static: Until K reaches Kc, crack will not grow
Cyclic: K applied can be well below Kc, crack grows
still!!!
1961, Paris et al used the theory of LEFM to explain

fatigue cracking successfully.
Methodology: experiments rst, then empirical equations

are proposed.
148
148
1. Initially, crack growth rate is small

2. Crack growth rate increases rapidly when a is large
3. Crack growth rate increases as the applied stress
increases
149
149
Fatigue
Fatigue occurs when a material is subjected to repeated loading and unloading (cyclic loading).
ASTM denes fatigue life, Nf, as the number of stress cycles of a specied character that a
specimen sustains before failure of a specied nature occurs.
Under cyclic loadings, materials can fail (due to fatigue) at stress levels well below their
strength.
Stress->Nf
Nf->allowable S
S-N curve
scatter!!!
endurance limit (g.han keo dai)
150
150
Constant variable cyclic load

K = Kmax Kmin
R = Kmin /Kmax
K = Kmax Kmin
crack grow per cycle
da
= f1 (K, R)
dN
K = Kmax Kmin = Kmax (1 R)

151
151
Paris law (fatigue)

Paris law
2m7
da
da
m
C(K)m, K =
==C(K)
=K
Kmax
KKmin
max
min
dN
dN
II
(Power law relationship for fatigue

crack growth in region II)
Fatigue crack growth behavior

in metals
N: number of load cycles
Paris law is the most popular fatigue crack growth model
Paris' law can be used to quantify the residual life

(in terms of load cycles) of a specimen given a particular crack size.
K Kth : no crack growth
(dormant period)
10
mm/cycle
152
152
Paris law
not depends on load ratio R
da
m
= C(K) , K = Kmax Kmin
dN
are
material
properties
that
must
be
C, m
determined experimentally.
153
153
Other fatigue models

Formans model (stage III)
Paris model
da
m
= C(K)
dN
R = Kmin /Kmax
Kmax Kmin
Kc (Kmax Kmin )
Kmax
Kmax
da
=
= Kc :
dN
As R increases, the crack growth rate increases.

154
154
Fatigue life calculation

Given: Grifth crack, 2a , , C, m, K , N
K = a
Question: compute N
0
Ic
m=4
da
da
=
dN =
m
C(K)
C( a)m
Z af
da
N = N0 +
m
C(
a)
a0
1
N = N0 +
C()4 2
af
a0
da
1
=
N
+
0
a2
C()4 2
1
1
a0
af
155
155
Fatigue life calculation

Given: Grifth crack, 2a , , C, m, K , N
K = a
Question: compute N
0
Ic
m=4
da
da
=
dN =
m
C(K)
C( a)m
Z af
da
N = N0 +
m
C(
a)
a0
1
N = N0 +
C()4 2
Kmax
af
a0
da
1
=
N
+
0
a2
C()4 2
1
1
a0
af
= max af = KIc
155
155
Numerical integration
of
fatigue
law
Z
af
N = N0 +
a0
da
C(f (a/W ) a)m
tedious to compute
156
156
Importance of
initial crack length
157
157
Miners rule for variable

1945
load amplitudes
Shortcomings:
1. sequence effect not considered
2. damage accumulation is
independent of stress level
1
2
N1 a 1
N1f
n
X
Ni
=1
N
if
i=1
N/Nif : damage
Ni
number of cycles a0 to ai
Nif
number of cycles a0 to ac
158
158
Variable amplitude cyclic loadings
da
= f2 (K, R, H)
dN
history variables
three stress values
plasticity: history dependent

plastic wake
159
159
Overload and crack retardation

It was recognized empirically that the application of a tensile overload in a constant
amplitude cyclic load leads to crack retardation following the overload; that is, the crack
growth rate is smaller than it would have been under constant amplitude loading.
160
160
Crack retardation
Point A: plastic
point B: elastic
After unloading: point A

and B has more or less the
same strain ->
point A : compressive stress.
161
161
Crack retardation
a large plastic zone at overload has

left behind
residual compressive plastic zone

close the crack->crack retards
162
162
Nondestructive testing
Nondestructive Evaluation (NDE), nondestructive Inspection
(NDI)
NDT is a wide group of analysis techniques used in science
and industry to evaluate the properties of a material,
component or system without causing damage
NDT: provides input (e.g. crack size) to fracture analysis
safety factor s
K(a, ) = Kc ac > at s
NDT ao
t : ao at
(Paris)
inspection time
163
163
Damage tolerance design

(stress concentration: possible crack sites)
1. Determine the size of initial defects a0 , NDI
2. Calculate the critical crack size ac at which failure
would occur
ac = KIc
3. Integrate the fatigue crack growth equations to
compute the number of load cycles for the crack to
grow from initial size to the critical size
N = N0 +
ac
a0
da
C( a)m
4. Set inspection intervals

164
164
Examples for Fatigue
da
= log C + m log K
log
dN
5.6 MPa m
K = a
17.72 MPa m
log(xy) = log(x) + log(y)

log(x ) = p log(x)
p
[Gdoutos]
af a0
da
=
dN
N
165
165
Example
166
166
Example (Gdoutos p.287)
A large thick plate contains a crack of length 2a=10 mm

and is subjected to a constant-amplitude tensile cyclic
stress normal to the crack of which min = 100 MPa and
max= 200 MPa. The critical SIF is KIc = 60 MPam. Fatigue
is governed by the following equation
da
11
3
= 0.42 10 (K)
dN
(m/cycle)
Plot the crack growth curve--a versus N up to the point

of fracture.
If a lifetime of 106 cycles is required, discuss the option
that the designer has for an improved lifetime.
167
167

200 af = 60
af = 28.65 mm
da
11
3
= 0.42 10 ( a)
dN
168
168
Example (Matlab)
A plate of width W=6 in contains a crack of length
2a=0.2 in and is subjected to a constant-amplitude tensile
cyclic stress normal to the crack with =12 ksi. Fatigue
is governed by the following equation
da
9
3.5
= 4 10 (K)
dN
Given
Plot the crack growth curve--a versus N up to the point
of fracture at which the critical crack length 2ac = 5.6 in.
For 2a=1 in, do the same and plot the two curves on
the same gure to see the inuence of a.
169
169
Summary
res
Kc
=
f (a/W ) a
What is the residual strength as a function of crack size?

f
(a
/W
)
a
=
K
What
is
the
critical
crack
size?
from
a
certain
How long does it take for a crack to grow
Z
da
c
initial size to the critical size? N = N +

0
170
ac
a0
C( a)m
170
Mixed-mode crack growth

Combination of mode-I, mode-II and mode-III loadings:
mixed-mode loading.
Cracks will generally propagate along a curved

surface as the crack seeks out its path of least
resistance.
Only a 2D mixed-mode loading (mode-I and mode-II) is
discussed.
171
171
Maximum circumferential
stress criterion
Erdogan and Sih
(from M. Jirasek)
principal
stress
172
r = 0
172
stress criterion
r = 0
KI
3
sin + sin
2
2
c = 2 arctan
1
4
+ KII
KI /KII
173
3
cos + 3 cos
2
2
=0
(KI /KI I)2 + 8

173
stress criterion
Fracture criterion
Keq KIc
174
Experiment
XFEM
p
1
c = 2 arctan
KI /KII (KI /KI I)2 + 8
4
175
175
Ductile to Brittle transition

Fractures occurred in welldesigned steel structures in severe
weather.
Titanic in the icy water of

Atlantic
At low temperatures some metals that would be ductile at room

temperature become brittle. This is known as a ductile to brittle
transition.
As a result, some steel structures are every
likely to fail in winter.
176
176
Stress corrosion cracking

corrosive environments
Metals are subject to corrosion
Fracture type: brittle!!!
Stress corrosion cracking (SCC): interaction of corrosion and

mechanical loadings to produce a cracking failure
Stress corrosion cracking is generally considered to be the most

complex of all corrosion type
177
177
Alternatives to LEFM
Bodies with at least one existing crack
Nonlinear zone ahead of the crack tip is
negligible
crack growth
Alternatives:
discussed
Continuum damage mechanics

Cohesive zone models
Peridynamics
Lattice models
crack
initiation/
formation
178
178
Fracture mechanics for

concrete
179
179
Introduction
LEFM theory was developed in 1920, but not until

1961 was the rst experimental research in concrete
performed.
Fracture mechanics was used successfully in

design for metallic and brittle materials early
on; however comparatively few applications
were found for concrete.
This trend continued up until the middle 70s

when nally major advances were made.
Experimentally observed size-effect can only

be explained using fracture mechanics
180
180
Tensile response of concrete
Tensile behavior of concrete is usually ignored: tensile strength is small
This prevented the efcient use of concrete

Tensile behavior plays a key role in understanding fracture of concrete
L
w
=
= 0 +
L
L
m
quasi-brittle
181
L
181
Fictitious crack model
Fracture Process Zone (FPZ)

concrete=quasi-brittle material
182
182
1976
Hilleborgs ctitious
crack model
Cohesive crack/zone model
Similar to the strip yield model of Dugdale-Barenblatt

183
183
Cohesive crack model

Fracture criterion
1 max ft
when
2 where (direction)
G=
([[u]])d[[u]]
Rankine criterion
184

Governing equations
(strong form)
Constitutive equations
deformation
separation
185
185

Weak form
where
186
186

Weak form
new term
where
186
186

Weak form
new term
where
(1) XFEM
Implementation:
(2) Interface
elements
(to be discussed later)
186
186
Size effect
Experiment tests: scaled versions of real structures
The result, however, depends on the size of the
specimen that was tested
From experiment result to engineering design:

knowledge of size effect required
the nominal
The size effect is dened by comparing
strength (nominal stress at failure) N of geometrically

similar structures of different sizes.
Classical theories (elastic analysis with allowable

stress): cannot take size effect into account
a
187
187
Size effect is crucial in concrete structures (dam,
bridges), geomechanics (tunnels): laboratory tests

are small
Size effect is less pronounced in mechanical and
aerospace engineering the structures or structural

components can usually be tested at full size.
cN P
=
bD
geometrically similar structures

of different sizes
b is thickness
188
188
Structures and tests

[Dufour]
189
189
Size effect (cont.)
1. Large structures are softer than small structures.

2. A large structure is more brittle and has a lower
strength than a small structure.
190
190
Bazants size effect law

N = ft = ft (D)
KIc
KIc
=
=
a
cN D
For very small structures the curve approaches the horizontal line and, therefore, the
failure of these structures can be predicted by a strength theory. On the other hand,
for large structures the curve approaches the inclined line and, therefore, the failure
of these structures can be predicted by LEFM.
191
191
Bazants size effect law
192
192
Continuum damage mechanics

Milan Jirasek
nominal stress
effective stress
Equilibrium: A = A
A
=
= (1 )
,
A
A
=1
A
damage variable
Hooks law: = E
= (1 )E
193
193
Four point bending test
194
194
Single Edged Notch Beam

(SEN beam)
Numerical solution with

CDM
Experiment
195
195
Computational
fracture mechanics
196
196
Numerical methods to
solve PDEs
BEM (Boundary Element Method)

MMs (Meshless/Meshfree methods)
FEM (Finite Element Method)
MMs
FEM
BEM
197
197
Fracture models
Discrete crack models (discontinuous
models)
- LEFM (FEM,BEM,MMs)
- EPFM (FEM,MMs)
- Cohesive zone models (FEM,XFEM,MMs)
Continuous models
- Continuum damage models (FEM,XFEM)

- Phase eld models (FEM)
Lattice models (FEM)

Peridynamic models (FEM,MMs)
198
198
FEM for elastic cracks

(1) double nodes
Developed in 1976 (Barsoum)

double nodes: crack edge
singular elements: crack tip
remeshing as crack grows
(3) remeshing
(2) singular
elements
1
behavior
r
199
199
Whats wrong with FEM for

crack problems
Element edges must conform to the crack geometry:
make such a mesh is time-consuming, especially for 3D

problems.
Remeshing as crack advances: difcult
200
200
However ...
Bouchard et al. CMAME 2003

201
Show crack growth movies

201
202
202
Extended Finite Element

Method (XFEM)
set of enriched nodes

S
X
X
h
u (x) =
NI (x)uI +
NJ (x)(x)aJ
Belytschko et al 1999
IS
JS c
standard part enrichment part

Partition of Unity (PUM)
X
NJ (x) = 1
enrichment function
X
NJ (x)(x) = (x)
(x)
known characteristics of the problem (crack tip singularity,
displacement jump etc.) into the203approximate space.
203
XFEM: enriched nodes

nodal support
NI (x) 6= 0
I
NJ (x)(x) = (x)
enriched nodes = nodes whose support is cut by the item

to be enriched
enriched node I: standard degrees ofuIfreedoms
aI dofs 204
(dofs) and additional
204
XFEM for LEFM

crack tip with known
displacement
r
KI
r
u=
cos
1 + 2 sin2
2 2
2
r
KI
r
v=
sin
+ 1 2 cos2
2 2
2
1 = f ( r, )
crack edge
x+
displacement: discontinuous across

crack edge
+
2 : 2 (x ) 6= 2 (x )
205
205
XFEM for LEFM (cont.)

Crack tip enrichment functions:
[B ] =
KI
r
cos
1 + 2 sin2
2 2
2
r
KI
r
v=
sin
+ 1 2 cos2
2 2
2
u=
r sin , r cos , r sin sin , r cos sin

2
2
2
2
"
Crack edge enrichment functions:

H(x) =
+1
1
if (x x ) n 0
otherwise
uh (x) =
blue nodes
red nodes
S
X
NI (x)uI
IS
NJ (x)H(x)aJ
JS c
+
206
KS t
NK (x)
4
X
=1
B b
K
!
206
Domain form of J-integral
FE mesh
J-integral is a contour integral that is not well suitable
to FE computations.
J=
uj
q
ij
W 1i
dA
x1
xi
207
207
XFEM for cohesive cracks

Wells, Sluys, 2001
u (x) =
X
IS
NI (x)uI +
NJ (x)H(x)aJ
JS c
No crack tip solution is known, no tip

enrichment!!!
not enriched to ensure zero

crack tip opening!!!
H(x) =
+1
1
if (x x ) n 0
otherwise
208
208
XFEM: SIFs computation

Mesh
One single mesh for all angles!!!

[VP Nguyen Msc. thesis]
Results
Matlab code: free

209
209
XFEM: examples
CENAERO, M. Duot
Northwestern Univ.
210
210
XFEM-Crack propagation
Samtech, Belgium
211
fracture of underwater
gas-lled pipeline
211
Meshfree methods
Bordas et al.
Elastic-plastic fracture
212
Shaofan Li 2012
212
Interface elements and

cohesive crack model
fracture of polycrystalline material
delamination of composites
213
213
Dynamic fracture
Dynamics is much more difcult than static
Dynamic fracture mechanics
- inertia forces (kinetic energy)
- rate-dependent material behavior
- reected stress waves
Classication
- LEFM -> Elastodynamic fracture mechanics
214
214
Crack speed of
215
215
Interfacial fracture mechanics
Thin lms
216
216
Fracture of composite
materials
217
217
Fiber reinforced
composites
218
218

Fracture Mechanics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fracture Mechanics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fracture mechanics

Nguyen Vinh Phu, PhD

Nguyen Vinh Phu

Sunday, September 30,

Gdoutos E.E (2005) Fracture Mechanics: an introduction,

Zehnder, T.A. (2007) Lecture Notes on Fracture

Brief recall on mechanics of materials

LEFM with small crack tip plasticity

Elastic-Plastic Fracture Mechanics

Mixed-mode crack propagation

Sunday, September 30,

Sunday, September 30,

1: ultimate tensile strength

Plastic deformation:volume does not change

strain softening=increasing strain while stress decrease

Some common material

Elastic perfectly plastic

Will be used extensively in Fracture Mechanics

Strain energy density

Strain energy density

Strain energy density

two times repeated index=sum,

i: free index (appears precisely once

treatment: welding, casting processes, cooling,

Knowledge of residual stresses is indispensable.

Cracks: ubiquitous !!!

Conventional failure analysis

: depends on the testing samples !!!

Many catastrophic failures occurred during

Sunday, September 30,

New Failure analysis