using czm

© All Rights Reserved

99 tayangan

using czm

© All Rights Reserved

- AWHEM Minutes 2009-12-08 - Approved
- 1851665676
- Fracture Mechanics, Schreus, 2012.pdf
- Vulnerable to Brittle Fracture
- Martinsson J
- 1-s2.0-0008884673900768-main
- Introduction to Fatigue Design April 09
- Template for Lab Report
- Guidelines and Parameter Selection for the Simulation of Progressive ion
- Simulation Fatigue Lifecycle Prediction 15
- Fracture Analysis of Cracks in Orthotropic Materials Using Ansys
- Size Effects in Concrete Fracture
- Cumulative Damage Prediction
- The Significance of Fatigue Crack Initiation for Predictions of the Fatigue Limit of Specimens and Structures
- 14222
- (2013 Carloni; Subramaniam) Investigation of Sub-critical Fatigue Crack Growth in FRP
- Effect of Welding and Weld Repair on Crack Propagation Behavior
- Extended NT2F12 Call for Paper
- 11778 krunal
- New Manasa M.tech Project Journal

Anda di halaman 1dari 15

DOI 10.1007/s10704-009-9391-y

ORIGINAL PAPER

growth using extended finite element methods

Yangjian Xu Huang Yuan

Received: 13 August 2008 / Accepted: 4 August 2009 / Published online: 30 August 2009

Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

(XFEM) combined with a cyclic cohesive zone model

(CCZM) is discussed and implemented for analysis of

fatigue crack propagation under mixed-mode loading

conditions. Fatigue damage in elastic-plastic materials is described by a damage evolution equation in the

cohesive zone model. Both the computational implementation and the CCZM are investigated based on

the modified boundary layer formulation under mixedmode loading conditions. Computational results confirm that the maximum principal stress criterion gives

accurate predictions of crack direction in comparison

with known experiments. Further popular multi-axial

fatigue criteria are compared and discussed. Computations show that the Findley criterion agrees with tensile

stress dominant failure and deviates from experiments

for shear failure. Furthermore, the crack propagation

rate under mixed mode loading has been investigated

systematically. It is confirmed that the CCZM can agree

with experiments.

Keywords Mixed-mode fatigue crack propagation

Extended finite element method Cyclic cohesive zone

model Boundary layer formulation

Y. Xu H. Yuan (B)

Department of Mechanical Engineering,

University of Wuppertal, 42097 Wuppertal, Germany

e-mail: h.yuan@uni-wuppertal.de

1 Introduction

Since damage mechanics models confront difficulties

in computational convergence as well as in strain localizations, the cohesive zone model (CZM) has been

popular in simulating material failure (Scheider et al.

2006; Tan et al. 2005; Yuan and Cornec 1990; Yuan

et al. 1996), which provides an alternative way to

describe crack propagation. In these works the crack

propagations are only modeled for simple loading history, i.e. fracture under monotonic loading conditions.

The idea in monotonic fracture is that the material fails

as soon as the critical fracture energy is exceeded, while

fatigue cracks follow accumulative damage. The cohesive zone model has been extended to model fatigue

in recent years (Nguyen et al. 2001; Siegmund 2004;

Yang et al. 2001). Compared to the crack simulation

under simple loading history, the development of the

cyclic cohesive zone model (CCZM) is still in the early

stages. Both cyclic damage accumulation and mixedmode failure are involved in controversial discussions.

A cyclic cohesive model for engineering applications

needs substantial further understanding and validation

with experiments.

An additional limitation for the cohesive zone model

is related to the finite element method. In most of

the published works the crack path was pre-assumed

(Scheider et al. 2006; Tan et al. 2005; Yuan and Cornec

1990; Yuan et al. 1996). The conventional finite element method does not allow new crack surfaces into

an element. Therefore, investigations of cohesive zone

123

152

models are mainly limited to the cohesive tractionseparation law with zero threshold under mode I loading. However, in engineering applications a fatigue

crack initiates under the shear loading condition (Stage

I) and propagate further under the mode I condition

(Stage II) (Socie and Marquis 2000). In this sense

fatigue crack propagation is generally mixed-mode.

Especially in nonproportional multi-axial fatigue, the

crack direction can vary with crack growth, and in these

cases the crack path cannot be pre-assumed. Additionally, the cohesive traction-separation law calculated

from atomistic simulations implies a finite threshold

value for the cohesive zone (Krull and Yuan 2009). As

discussed in Zhai et al. (2004), it is difficult to simulate the curve crack propagation, even impracticable

for 3D mixed-mode crack problems using FEM (Chen

et al. 2005).

Recently several promising computational methods

for considering discontinuity (Oden et al. 1998; Zi

et al. 2005), generally referred as extended finite element methods (XFEM), have been developed based on

Melenk and Babuskas work on the approach of partition of unity (Melenk and Babska 1996). In these

type of methods, the discontinuity is introduced by

means of additional degrees of freedom (DOFs) on

those elements where the discontinuity crosses. The

most appealing feature is that the XFEM inherits the

finite element framework and its advantageous properties, such as sparsity and symmetry. Combining with

the XFEM, the cohesive zone model can be naturally incorporated to simulate mixed-mode crack propagation and has found wide application (Jirasek and

Zimmermann 2001; Mergheim et al. 2005; Meschke

and Dumstorff 2007; Wells and Sluys 2001; Simone

et al. 2003; Zi and Belytschko 2003). Using the XFEM,

one can consider crack initiation at an arbitrary material

point and crack propagation in an arbitrary direction,

without adding extra nodes and elements. Additionally,

it allows multi-cracks nucleation, growth and coalescence without remeshing.

Under mixed-mode loading conditions crack propagation depends on loading mode mixity and intensity.

The loading mode mixity affects crack direction, while

the intensity determines the crack growth rate. In the

past decades many different fatigue criteria were suggested based on experimental observations and fracture mechanics considerations (Qian and Fatemi 1996;

Richard 1984, 1985; Socie and Marquis 2000). A popular criterion was developed based on maximal principal

123

Y. Xu, H. Yuan

fracture analysis (Richard 1984, 1985). More experimental observations reveal that both fatigue and fracture of a cracked specimen share the same crack angle,

at least for finite/high cycle fatigue (Richard 1989;

Sander and Richard 2006). That is, one may use the

conventional fracture criterion to predict fatigue crack

direction. On the other hand, multi-axial fatigue investigation in uncracked specimens generally suggests

that fatigue failure is related to the shear stress/strain

amplitude and the normal stress on the shear plane.

A systematic review of different fatigue models can

be found in Karolczuk and Macha (2005), Socie and

Marquis (2000). As Findley (1956) model introduced

[ f = (/2 + kn )max ], the damage indicator for

multi-axial fatigue is based on shear stress/strain amplitude and normal stress. The index max denotes that

the damage indicator f reaches its maximum, i.e. the

critical plane, which gives the direction of material failure under mixed-mode condition. Obviously, the Findleys model differs from the maximal principal stress

criterion used in fracture mechanics.

In the present study, a modified boundary layer

model is used to investigate the correlation between

external loading mixity and crack propagation based

on the XFEM in combination with the CCZM. Crack

extensions under both simple and cyclic mixed-mode

loading are considered. Different fracture criteria are

evaluated. The feasibility of predicting fatigue crack

propagation behavior under mixed-mode loading based

on the CCZM is validated by known experiments.

(XFEM)

2.1 The discontinuity in finite elements

Comprehensive overviews of discontinuity methods

in conjunction with partition of unity property have

been given by numerous publications (De Borst 2006;

Belytschko et al. 1988; Jirasek and Zimmermann 2001;

Mergheim et al. 2005). The XFEM, based on the

approach of partition of unity, is an efficient way to

reduce mesh dependency when it is used to analyze

crack growth. The key lies in that the discontinuity

field space can be directly approximated by introducing the enriched degrees of freedom and the enriched

basis function j . By combining the function j with

153

property can be inherited from the standard basis function, and the specific discontinuous property is from

the enriched function j as well.

Note that the approximation is only locally enriched

in the region of interest such as the damage zone.

According to the approach of partition of unity, if the

standard basis function i fulfills the partition of unity

n

i = 1), the enriched field approximation

(i.e. i=1

can be expressed as following:

n

m

u=

(1)

i a i +

j bi j ,

i=1

j=1

standard basis function i , and j is the enriched function with m terms. ai is the vector of the conventional

degrees of freedom on node i, and bi j is the vector of

the enhanced degrees of freedom associated with node

i. Since DOFs are enriched on the existing nodes, modification of topology can be avoided.

In the finite element notation, the element shape

function N fulfils the partition of unity. If the discontinuity is contained in the finite element and the enriched

basis is taken as Heaviside function Hd , the approximation of displacement field can be written as

u = N(a + Hd b) =

Na + Hd Nb,

standard

(2)

, with the discontinuity d , as shown in Fig. 1.

In the formulation, only the nodes associated with

the discontinuity d have to be enriched. That is, the

extra enriched term in Eq. (2) will be considered for

these nodes. Otherwise, the standard shape function is

retrieved. By the enriched degrees of freedom, the discontinuity is introduced directly. Effectively, the standard DOFs, a are used to represent the continuum part,

while the enriched DOFs b, stand for a displacement

jump across the border d , expressed as

(4)

discontinuity, the nodal displacements are computed

iteratively from the global equilibrium equations.

u

Fig. 1 An FEM domain crossed by the discontinuity d and

restrained by the applied boundary conditions. d does not exist

before the material failure starts

We consider a domain, , with a discontinuity, d ,

as shown in Fig. 1. Without taking body forces into

account, the equilibrium equations can be expressed as

following,

=0

in ,

(5)

stress tensor. The essential and natural boundary conditions are, respectively provided as

m = t on d ,

u = u on u .

enriched

degrees of freedom, respectively. The Heaviside step

function Hd is defined as

0 if x ,

Hd =

(3)

1 if x + .

[u] = Nb |d .

n = t on t ,

(6)

discontinuity d and n is the outward normal vector

of the boundary. Correspondingly, t is the inner traction in d and t is the prescribed traction vector at the

boundary t . u is the prescribed displacement at the

boundary u .

Equation (5) can be converted into the governing

equation of the XFEM by using the Galerkin formulation. If the discontinuity d is not traction-free, due to

the cohesive zone for example, we may introduce an

additional function to connect + and as

d .

= T(Nb)|

t = T[u]

(7)

d . Generally speaking, d is determined during computation and contains nonlinear features so that all of

the finite element equations are to be solved incrementally. Using the Galerkin method and considering the

nonlinear behavior of the discontinuity curve, the linearized governing equations of the XFEM (Wells and

Sluys 2001) can be obtained as

123

154

Kaa Kab

Kba Kbb

a

f

f

= a,ext a,int

fb,ext

fb,int

b

(8)

Monotonic Loading

with

0.8

fa,int =

BT d,

fb,int =

BT d +

+

fa,ext =

NT td,

fb,ext =

NT td,

-0.2

0.0

BT DBd,

+

T

Kba = Kab

=

BT DBd,

+

BT DBd +

+

NT TNd.

d

denote the increment of nodal displacements in an

incremental step. In addition, D is the material stiffness matrix; T is the cohesive stiffness matrix and B is

the strain matrix.

In the present work the crack tip is located at the

end of the cohesive zone so that the stress at the crack

tip becomes non-singular. One gets the same numerical accuracy by the XFEM without using special shape

functions.

growth

3.1 The cohesive law for fracture

Through experiments it has been proven that the crack

propagation is dominated by the mode I loading case in

both brittle and ductile material for cracked specimens

(Richard 1985, 1989). Based on this consideration, the

failure is dominated by the normal traction, Tn (Fig. 2).

123

1.0

2.0

3.0

n

4.0

5.0

6.0

Fig. 2 The cyclic cohesive zone model under pure normal separation. Under the simple loading condition the cohesive law

is identical with the model of Xu and Needleman (1994), as

0 = 0 in (11). Under unloading and reloading the traction

decreases/increases linearly with separation. The material damage is characterized by diminishing tensile strength Tn together

with decreasing material stiffness

BT DBd,

Kbb =

0.4

Kab =

Degradation

0.2

NT td,

t+

Kaa =

0.6

d

t

and

T n / max,0

Y. Xu, H. Yuan

an exponential function of the separation as suggested

by Xu and Needleman (1994), while the shear traction

Tt is assumed to be linearly related to the tangential

separation. Under monotonic loading conditions, the

relationship between tractions and separations in the

cohesive law is

written as

n

n

t 2

exp 2 ,

(9)

Tn =

0

0

0

t

Tt = G t ,

(10)

0

where

n = n + 0

(11)

denotes the effective normal separation. n is the normal separation from the FEM computation. 0 stands

for a model parameter to consider the threshold value

of the cohesive traction. For 0 = 0 the model recurs

to the original version of the model of Xu and Needleman (1994). G t is the shear stiffness and t is the tangential separation. The characteristic cohesive length is

denoted by 0 . The fracture energy, n , resulting from

normal separation for failure is calculated as

n = emax 0 ,

(12)

the cohesive normal strength of material. In the crack

the parameter max is a model parameter to fit experimental curves, together with 0 (Scheider et al. 2006).

Under cyclic loading conditions the material may fail

at a significantly lower loading level than the material strength. This implies that max decreases with the

cyclic loading history.

A CCZM should be able to describe both fracture

under monotonic loading and fatigue failure, i.e. due

to accumulative damage (Nguyen et al. 2001; Roe and

Siegmund 2003; Siegmund 2004). The accumulative

damage will be described by an additional damage

parameter, Dc , which is determined by a damage evolution equation for the cyclic loading process, as suggested by Roe and Siegmund (2003) and Siegmund

(2004)

f

Tn

| n |

H( 0 )

(13)

D c =

max

max,0

| n | dt. In the above

with D c 0 and =

expression H represents the Heaviside function which

prescribes that the damage accumulation starts once

the accumulated material separation is greater than

the characteristic length 0 . The cohesive strength is

affected by Dc , which can be written as

max = (1 Dc )max,0

with max,0 as the initial cohesive strength. Obviously,

this consideration is a direct extension of continuum

damage mechanics (Lemaitre 1996). Additionally, f

is the cohesive zone endurance limit, and is the accumulated cohesive length which scales the increment of

material separation n .

In this investigation, the unloading and reloading

are assumed to proceed along a current stiffness, kn =

max,0 (1 dc )e/0 , which is equal to the slope of the

current cohesive curve at zero separation. This assumption will lead to the presence of a residual separation.

The material damage is presumed to be accumulating

during the whole process of unloading and reloading,

except for the case of compression, i.e. n < 0. As for

the potential compressing case, from a viewpoint of

numerical treatment, the material penetration at the discontinuity is reduced by enhancing the material compression stiffness.

155

The XFEM (8) combined with the cyclic cohesive

model (9)(13) has been implemented within ABAQUS via the user element subroutine (UEL) (ABAQUS

2006). The subroutine UEL allows the user to define a

new element in which all variables, e.g. strains, stresses

and residual forces as well as the element stiffness

matrix, have to be passed in and updated for a new

iteration. In the present work, the degrees of freedom

at enriched nodes are covered by some additional variables to include displacement discontinuity within an

element. In the present UEL subroutine the main following functions are achieved: (1) updating strains and

stresses; (2) generating an element stiffness matrix; (3)

determining tractions and separations in accordance

with cohesive law; (4) defining crack initiation and

propagation; (5) creating data for post-processing. For

simplicity only two kinds of discontinuity patterns are

implemented, as shown in Fig. 3. That is, a cohesive zone can go through two opposite element edges

(Fig. 3a) or through two adjacent edges of one element

(Fig. 3b). All other crack paths can be represented by

these two patterns.

The integration scheme is crucial in the implementation of the XFEM. Here, an intersected element is

divided into 8 triangular zones and integrated based

on 24 integration points, together with two integration

points for the discontinuity curve, as shown in Fig. 3.

Note that the partition of the element is merely for

integration based on iso-parametric interpolations over

all the triangles, while no additional node is needed.

Additionally, to reduce computational efforts, only the

potential damage zone is covered with user-defined elements, otherwise the conventional isotropic elements

are adopted. Connections between two zones are realized without special algorithms.

In the XFEM programme, another two built-in

ABAQUS subroutines are adopted. Using subroutine

UEXTERNALDB, one can exchange data between

external databases and user subroutines at the required

steps. Based on the subroutine, initial user-defined

parameters can be passed into subroutine UEL, and the

results obtained from the user-defined elements can be

written to the output file. The other important builtin subroutine is URDFIL by which the results of the

general elements from ABAQUS (e.g. element type

CPE4) can be explored. With these two subroutines,

the user-defined elements and ABAQUS elements can

123

156

Y. Xu, H. Yuan

(a)

(b)

Fig. 3 Two types of intersected elements implemented in ABAQUS. The middle line with two dots denotes the discontinuity in

the XFEM-element. a The discontinuity divides a quadrilateral

into two sub-quadrilaterals. b The discontinuity separates an element into one triangle and another pentagon. In both cases the

enhanced elements are divided into 8 sub-triangles for integration. Each sub-triangle possesses three integration points (open

circles). The discontinuity curve is integrated using two integration points (solid circles)

post-processor of ABAQUS does not support the userdefined elements, the output database (ODB) has to be

modified by the user in order to visualize the results.

In the present work, a Python script is used to produce an ODB file which is compatible with the ABAQUS/Viewer.

may correlate crack propagation with external loading parameters K I and K I I . The modified boundary

formulation method states that the desired load case

with respect to different combination of K I and K I I

fields can be directly applied on the external boundary.

The displacement-controlled loads can be obtained by

superposing mode I and mode II displacement fields

from fracture mechanics, as

5 Computational models

applied to the investigations of three-point and fourpoint bending cases. The results are in good agreement with the experimental observations (Xu and Yuan

2009a,b). In order to understand further the fracture and

fatigue mechanisms, the modified boundary layer formulation is investigated. In fracture analysis, the modified boundary layer formulation is popular to identify

the relation between loading mixity and crack tip field

(Anderson 1995; Larsson and Carlsson 1973; Yuan

2002). In this case both loading mixity and intensity

can be characterized by K I and K I I in the remote

field. In the present work the modified boundary layer

formulation is used to predict crack angles and crack

growth rate under the given mixed-mode loading. For

a small amount of crack growth the loading mixity of

123

r

KI

cos

G(1 + ) 2

2

,

1 + (1 + ) sin2

2

r

KI

sin

=

G(1 + ) 2

2

2

2 (1 + ) cos

;

2

uIx =

uIy

uI Ix

r

KI I

=

sin

G(1 + ) 2

2

,

2 + (1 + ) cos2

2

(14)

uI Iy

r

cos

1 +

2

2

.

+(1 + ) sin2

2

KI I

=

G(1 + )

157

(15)

as Poissons ratio. The applied displacements, u x and

u y , are obtained by superposing u I with u I I like so:

ux = u I x + u I I x ,

uy = uIy + uI Iy

(16)

at

the remote boundary with the radius of r0 =

x02 + y02 and the polar angle = tan1 (y0 /x0 ). The

initial crack tip is located at the origin of the geometry (r = 0). The cyclic loading is imposed by varying

the stress intensity factors, K I and K I I . For simplicity we only consider pulsating load with the loading

ratio R = K min /K max = 0 so that K = K max . The

range of stress intensity factor K is correlated with

the incremental energy release rate G as

G =

(1 2 )K 2

.

E

(17)

The global finite element mesh and the boundary conditions are plotted in Fig. 4. To reduce the artificial

effect of K fields on the crack, crack propagation is

confined to a small region, and its area is negligible in

comparison to the whole specimen (less than 1%). The

radius of the crack extension region, l, is smaller than

5%r0 , where r0 represents the radius of the boundary

layer model. As shown in Fig. 4b, the mesh is highly

refined in the crack extension region.

Computations were performed under the plane strain

condition in ABAQUS, in which the CPE4-type element was employed, together with the user-defined

elements discussed in the previous sections. To save

computational time, only those elements near the crack

path were defined as the user-defined elements.

The material properties of the specimen are normalized by yield stress 0 which is not needed in elastic

materials. Accordingly, elastic modulus E = 3000 ,

and Poissons ratio = 0.3. For the cohesive model,

the cohesive strength and length are taken as max,0 =

6.70 and 0 = 0.0153 mm, respectively. In this investigation, in accordance with a suggestion from Roe and

Siegmund (2004), the parameters f and are set to

0.25max,0 and 40 , respectively.

It is a common postulate that a crack in brittle materials propagates toward mode I, i.e. in the direction

following K I I = 0. Among known fracture criteria,

the maximum tangential stress (MTS) criterion and the

maximum energy release rate (MERR) criterion are

most popular, and have been widely applied in fracture mechanics analysis (Anderson 1995). Since the

philosophy of fracture mechanics differs from that of

fatigue assessment, a criterion for a fatigue crack could

be distinctive. Under multi-axial loading conditions,

for instance, the shear stress amplitude is responsible

for fatigue failure and the fatigue crack follows the socalled critical plane of the damage indicator (Socie and

Marquis 2000).

In the present section we are computing fatigue

crack growth based on various criteria with verification

of experimental data from literature. Richard (1985)

and Sander and Richard (2006) carried out a number of

tests for the mixed-mode crack extension under the simple or cyclic loading cases. Most tests were based on the

Compact Tension Shear (CTS)-specimen which was

put forward first by Richard (1984, 1985, 1989). With

this specimen the mode-mixity in fracture mechanics

can be effectively and conveniently calculated, making

it easy to evaluate the crack extension by the fracture

mechanics method. Different loading mode mixities

can be approached by varying the loading angle () of

the specimen in 15 -steps, from = 0 to 90 . Pure

Mode I ( = 0 ), pure Mode II ( = 90 ) or mixedmode( = 15 , . . . , 75 ) situations can be generated

by the use of just a uniaxial testing system. The details

can be obtained from Richard (1984, 1985, 1989).

6.1.1 Maximum tangential stress criterion

The MTS criterion is one of the most popular fracture

models for material strength. It was proposed by Erdogan and Sih (1963) as

3

( )|=0 = K I 3 cos + cos

2

2

3

3K I I sin + sin

(18)

2

2

max

for the angular function of the circumferential stress

component . According to this criterion, the crack

123

158

Y. Xu, H. Yuan

mesh for the modified

boundary layer formulation

(MBLF). The remote

boundary (r = r0 ) is loaded

by the given displacements

according to the plane strain

K -fields in fracture

mechanics. a The whole

mesh. b The refined mesh

around initial crack tip

the circumferential stress becomes maximum, i.e.

/ = 0. It follows

1

KI 2

1 KI

0

=

+ 8.

(19)

tan

2

4 KI I

4

KI I

In this criterion, K I and K I I are loading parameters and

are directly used to determine the cracking orientation.

This criterion has been verified by many experimental

results.

weighted Gaussian function (Mergheim et al. 2005) is

defined as

w(r

)

with

w(r ) = n gp

i Ai

i=1 w

1

r 2

.

(20)

w(r

) = exp

[2]2

2

failure is related to a certain material volume, but not

affected by the stress state at a single mathematical

point. From discussions on nonlocal damage mechanics we learn that the local damage assumption may

lead to a paradox in computations. A nonlocal criterion accounts for a weighted averaging of the damage

over a certain area, which can reduce effects of the

local stress distribution. That is, the nonlocal criterion

may diminish the influence of the finite element size.

For this reason, the maximum principal stress criterion

based on the averaging method is becoming popular in

the computational mechanics community (Mergheim

et al. 2005; De Borst 2006). In the present work we use

the nonlocal maximum principal stress criterion to predict mixed-mode crack growth, as suggested by Wells

and Sluys (2001).

The nonlocal stress is computed as a weighted average of the stress over n gp Gaussian points around the

123

expression,

n gp

i wi Ai .

(21)

i=1

In the above equations r is the distance of the Gaussian point to the cohesive zone tip and denotes the

radius of the nonlocal zone. The nonlocal stress tensor

results from the sum of the local stresses at the Gaussian points i, the weight function wi and the associated

area Ai . In the 2-dimensional case the orientation of

maximum principal stress can be calculated from the

nonlocal stresses as

2x y

tan(20 ) =

.

(22)

x y

In the XFEM computations the maximum principal

stress criterion includes two aspects: propagation of

the cohesive zone, and direction of the cohesive zone

propagation. During computations the maximum principal stress ahead of the cohesive zone tip is calculated

and checked against the fatigue limit of the material.

Once it exceeds the fatigue limit, the enhanced degrees

of freedom in this element are activated. That is, the

the direction of crack extension, the criterion states that

the crack will grow in the perpendicular direction to that

of nonlocal maximum principal stress.

The nonlocal maximum principal stress differs from

the local maximum principal stress just due to averaging over a certain region. In XFEM the NMPS is easier

to realize in comparison with the MTS criterion.

In Fig. 5 the crack paths of two mixed-mode loading cases are plotted, and they are predicted based on

the NMPS criterion. The loading ratios, K I I /(K I +

K I I ), for these two cases are 0.22 and 0.47, respectively, which correspond to the loading orientations of

the CTS-specimen (Richard 1984, 1985), = 30 and

= 60 . Whereas K I I /(K I + K I I ) = 0.22 shows

a straight crack path, the higher mode II, K I I /(K I +

K I I ) = 0.47, causes varying kinking angles after crack

initiation. With crack growth the angle increases from

0 to 1 and finally reaches a steady state.

Figure 6a summarizes the steady crack angles as

a function of the loading ratio. The computations are

based on three different criteria: MTS, NMPS and

MERR. The experimental results were taken from the

works of Richard (1984, 1985, 1989). All criteria fall

in a small scatter band in the whole loading ratio and

agree with experimental results (Richard 1984, 1985,

1989). The predictions based on the MTS and MERR

criteria come from the analytical solution (Anderson

1995). The results of the nonlocal maximum principal

stress criterion (NMPS) were acquired from XFEM so

that the crack path can be characterized in detail.

The predictions from MTS and MERR assume a

straight crack, while the XFEM computational analysis

shows a curved crack path. In Fig. 6b the crack initiation

angles 0 calculated from both XFEM computation and

analytical solution are summarized, as well as the stabilized crack angles 1 from the XFEM computation,

and the experimental results. After a crack initiates with

kinking, the stress field around the crack tip changes.

It follows that the crack no longer propagates in the

initial direction. The computations show that the crack

initiation angles are generally significantly smaller than

the experimental data, while the stabilized angles agree

with experimental observation. Additionally, as shown

in Fig. 5b, the transient phase of crack initiation in

mixed-mode cracking is too small to be measured in

experiments. However, it can be observed from our

numerical XFEM calculation. To validate that the initial

kinking is not induced by numerical errors, the analyt-

159

analytical crack stress fields and maximum principal

stress criterion. The calculations indicate that the analytical solutions are in good agreement with the XFEM

results, as shown in Fig. 6b.

6.1.3 The modified Findleys multi-axial fatigue

criterion

Multi-axial fatigue criteria such as Findley (1956),

Fatemi-Socie and Marquis (2000) and McDiarmid

(1994), etc. have been proposed for predicting fatigue

failure. Combined with the critical plane concept, the

multi-axial fatigue criteria try to predict crack propagation direction (Karolczuk and Macha 2005; Socie

and Marquis 2000). Some experimental observations

in multi-axial fatigue seem, however, not to agree with

fracture mechanics predictions.

Development of multi-axial fatigue life assessment

relies mainly on extensive experimental observations

(Karolczuk and Macha 2005; Socie and Marquis 2000).

Life models are trying to give a prediction of component durability in service, without detailed information about crack initiation and crack propagation.

Crack growth is caused by cyclic loading and will not

be described explicitly by fracture parameters, but by

the macro-stresses and strains. Therefore, fatigue differs from fracture significantly. Based on experimental

observations Sines (Socie and Marquis 2000) predicted

that the multi-axial fatigue failure is related to the shear

stress amplitude and the total normal stress, but is independent of total shear stress and less dependent on the

normal stress amplitude. It turns out that the fatigue

damage indicator is a function of the shear stress amplitude, , and the normal stress at the shear plane, n .

Using the critical plane concept one can predict the failure direction (Socie and Marquis 2000). Such considerations have been further extended to both high cycle

fatigue and low cycle fatigue. This concept seems not to

be compatible with the mixed-mode fracture mechanics. In this section we are implementing the Findleys

model to re-analyze crack propagation under mixedmode loading conditions.

Findley took the idea of Sines (Socie and Marquis

2000) and assumed that the material failure is characterized by the following parameter (Findley 1956),

+ n

.

(23)

f =

2

max

123

160

Y. Xu, H. Yuan

predicted by the NMPS

criterion: a

K I /(K I + K I I ) = 0.22

corresponds to the loading

orientation = 30 ; b

K I /(K I + K I I ) = 0.47

corresponds to = 60 .

The crack angle changes

from the initiation angle 0

to the steady-state angle 1

(a)

(b)

O

O

70

60

60

50

50

()

70

()

(b) 80

40

30

40

30

Experimental value

MPS steady comp. solu.

MTS analy. solu.

MERR analy. solu.

20

10

0

(a) 80

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Experimental Value

MPS initial comp. solu.

MPS steady comp. solu.

MPS analy. solu.

20

10

0

0

0.2

0.4

KII/ (KI+KII)

0.6

0.8

KII/ (KI+KII)

loading conditions, predicted by different criteria: MTS, NMPS

and MERR. Experimental data are taken from the works of

Richard (1984, 1985). a The stabilized angle as a function of

0 and the steady-state angle 1 based on analytical and computational analyses using nonlocal MPS criterion

is introduced in order to consider the effects of the mean

stress, primarily for smooth specimens. Usually is

significantly smaller than 0.5 which implies that fatigue

is dominated by the shear stress amplitude. The criterion is effective for a proportional combination of

tension and torsion loading configurations (Socie and

Marquis 2000). The damage occurs at the plane with

the biggest value of f , the critical plane. According to

Findleys model (Socie and Marquis 2000) the critical

plane depends on the direction of the shear stress amplitude, the mean normal stress and the coefficient . For

ductile materials is small and the position of the critical plane approaches the maximum shear stress. For

brittle materials is large and the critical plane turns

perpendicular to the maximum principal stress.

one has to reformulate the definition of the damage

indicator (23). To consider normal stress and shear

stress simultaneously, we re-write Eq. (23) into

123

f = (an + b ) max .

(24)

the effects of both shear stress amplitude and normal

stress can be adjusted simultaneously. The expression

identifies a critical plane for fatigue crack initiation and

propagation depending on both alternated shear stress

and maximum normal stress at that plane. The crack

will propagate along the critical plane on which the

resultant value of these two terms in Eq. (24) is maximal and surpasses the failure limit f . Observing this

expression, one finds that this fatigue criterion tends

161

80

Criteria: (a n +b )max= f

60

40

()

20

0

Experiment

a=0.0,b=1.0

a=0.3,b=0.7

a=0.5,b=0.5

a=0.7,b=0.3

a=1.0,b=0.0

-20

-40

-60

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

KII/ (KI+KII)

Fig. 7 Crack angle as a function of the loading mixity predicted

by the modified Findleys model (24)

fracture mechanics as b goes to zero.

Figure 7 shows crack angle as a function of the

loading mixity computed using the XFEM with various values for a and b. The results confirm that the

crack angle is sensitive to both parameters a and b. As b

increases the effect of shear stress rises. That means the

crack angle will kink even under mode I loading conditions, which seems not to coincide with the known

experimental observations in a pre-cracked specimen

(Richard 1989). On the other side, effects of a and b

on the predicted crack angle are nonlinear. For b < 0.5

and a > 0.5 the crack angle does not deviate from the

known experimental results significantly.

6.2 Fatigue crack propagation rates

Siegmund (2004) has used the cyclic cohesive model

for fatigue crack growth in various specimens and load

cases. Their extensive investigations indicate the feasibility of CCZM for life prediction, and the computations reproduce Paris law in cracked specimens based

on the incremental energy release rate G. However,

their discussions are limited to some special cases due

to the limitations of FEM mentioned in the Sect. 1.

Based on the current proposed method, the computational prediction can be extended to more general

mixed-mode cases. In this section, the fatigue crack

propagation rate will be further investigated via the

modified boundary layer formulation.

Firstly, the pure mode I loading is considered, illustrating the detailed procedure of fatigue life prediction

and investigating the validity in terms of applying the

XFEM combined with CCZM in fatigue life assessment. In Fig. 8a, the approximately linear relationship between the crack extension and loading cycle

number in the double-logarithmic coordinate system

is depicted. The slopes of these curves (i.e. crack propagation rates) depend on K I . As K I increases the

crack growth rate rises. On the basis of these data, the

crack propagation rates can be expressed as a function

of G/n according to Expression (17). As shown in

Fig. 8b, it can be seen that d(a/0 )/d N is linearly

dependent on G/n in double-logarithmic coordinates, which can be curve-fitted in Paris law

G m

d(a/0 )

=C

(25)

dN

n

with C = 67.35 and m = 2.16. Paris law only

describes stationary fatigue crack growth, whereas the

CCZM also can predict fatigue crack growth in low and

high loading amplitudes. By introducing the threshold,

f in the damage evolution Eq. (13), one may shift

the fatigue limit in the life curve. That is, the fatigue

damage predicted in the XFEM approaches a threshold

below which the material degradation will not occur.

On the other hand, the normalized energy release rate

range possesses an upper limit which is characterized

by the general cohesive law without cyclic damage.

The traction degradation processes on three material

points ahead of the initial crack tip under K I loading

conditions are recorded in Fig. 9, which shows different damage processes in a cracked specimen. All

three points are located on the crack path along the

initial crack direction, as shown in Fig. 4. Point A is

at the initial crack tip. Point C is 10 elements away

from Point A, i.e. approximately, 0.3 l (l denotes the

length of the refined region). B is located in the middle

of A and C. Since A is located at the initial crack tip

where the stress concentration occurs initially and the

stress level is highest, the cohesive zone goes through

A earlier than the other points. Once the criterion of

cohesive zone growth has been satisfied, the discontinuity will immediately be introduced into these elements ahead of the crack tip. Thereafter, with the cyclic

damage accumulation and the cohesive zone propagation, the loading capacity of the material point begins

to sink and the material degrades gradually. As shown

in Fig. 9, Point A experiences the highest peak traction,

123

162

Y. Xu, H. Yuan

(b) -0.5

(a) 35

K I=2.00

KI=2

25

KI=2.5

K I=2.50

20

KI=2.75

K I=2.75

d (a / 0 )

G

= 67.35

dN

n

-0.7

log(d(a/ d 0 )/dN)

a/ d 0

-0.6

KI=2.25

K I=2.25

15

30

2.16

-0.8

-0.9

-1

KII=0

KII =0

10

-1.1

5

0

-1.2

0

50

100

150

N (cycles)

-1.3

-1.5

250

200

-1.4

-1.3

-1.2

log(G/f n)

-1.1

-1

Fig. 8 Correlation between crack growth and mode I loading: a variation of crack growth with loading amplitude K I ; b dependence

of crack growth rate on G

(a) 0.8

(b) 1

0.7

point A

point B

0.6

0.8

Dc at B

Dc at C

0.8

Tn at A

point C

Tn / max,0

0.4

0.3

0.2

Tn at B

0.6

Tn at C

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

Dc

0.6

0.5

Tn / max,0

Dc at A

0.1

0

0

-0.1

0.17

-0.2

0.27

0.37

0.47

0.57

n / 0

20

40

60

80

100

-0.2

Cycles (N)

Fig. 9 Evolution of material damage predicted by XFEM: a the predicted traction-separation responses for three points A, B, C along

the crack path; b the relationships between traction and damage evolution of the three points

and subsequently it decreases gradually with loading

cycles, till complete failure.

The material separation processes at B and C are

distinctly different from that at A. Both Fig. 9a, b indicate that the material damage process at B is similar to

that at C. Their traction first experiences the hardening

process, then drops as they form the envelope curves.

In both cases the peaks of traction are nearly the same,

Tn /max,0 0.5, and the shapes of the envelope curves

123

postponed. The similarity of the traction losing process

for Points B and C indicates that the damage process

tends to be steady after a small crack growth phase.

These results are in good agreement with experimental

observation, and the steady state propagation of fatigue

crack indicates the features of Paris law.

Figure 9 additionally indicates that the damage indicator Dc grows over-proportionally due to the interaction of traction and separation, which is mathematically

163

(a) -0.2

(b) 1.2

-0.4

1.2

KI /KII =2

KI /KII =1

KI /KII =0.5

1

-0.8

-1

-1.2

-1.6

-1.8

-1.6

-1.5

-1.4

-1.3

-1.2

-1.1

0.8

KII =0

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

KII=0

KI=0

KI/KII=1

KI/KII=2

KI/KII=0.5

-1.4

KI =0

0.8

|max

MTS

Analy. Solu.

Crack growth rate

0.2

-1

-0.9

0.2

log (G/fn)

0.4

0.6

KII/ (KI+KII)

Scaled s |max

log(d(a/d0)/dN)

-0.6

0.2

0.8

conditions: a the fatigue crack growth rate versus the applied

energy release rate range; b the scaled |max obtained from

crack tip field according to the MTS criterion versus the scaled

crack growth rates at log(G/n ) = 1.25

described in Eq. (13). Furthermore, comparing the variations of Dc over Points A and C, it can be found that

when the material point A is just completely damaged,

i.e. Dc = 1, Dc on C is just setting out, meaning that

the cohesive zone is just now embedded in this element.

This result signifies that the length of the cohesive zone

in this investigation is the distance between A and C.

Based on experimental observations (Richard 1984,

1989; Sander and Richard 2006), the mixed-mode

fatigue crack in brittle materials or high cycle fatigue

is searching in the direction of mode I and the crack

propagation is dominated by the mode I stress field.

In this sense, understanding of the mode I crack is

essential for understanding of mixed-mode cracks. To

examine the validity of the proposed method for mixedmode fatigue, various combinations of K I and K I I

have been considered. In Fig. 10a, fatigue crack growth

rate, d(a/0 )/d N , is plotted with respect to the normalized energy release rate range (G/n ), under various mixed-mode loadings. For the mixed-mode case,

G = G I + G I I is introduced.

We find a linear correlation between log[d(a/0 )/

d N ] and log(G/n ) for all cases analyzed with a

unique exponent m of Paris law (25), regardless of

mode-mixity. That is, even for the mixed-mode fatigue

cracking there exists a Paris law as, d(a/0 )/d N =

C(G/n )m , in which m is independent of mode-mixity, but the parameter C varies with K I I /(K I + K I I ).

terms of pure K I I is evidently higher than that of pure

K I . The maximum rate is reached under mixed-mode

loading. This is rather unexpected, because one would

usually assume the maximum rate under the mode I

loading case, due to normal stress failure assumed in

the model.

To clarify this variation, the crack growth rate for

a given loading intensity, log(G/n ) = 1.25, is

plotted as a function of loading mixity in Fig. 10b.

For comparison, the maximum circumferential stress

|max in accordance with the MTS criterion is calculated and plotted in Fig. 10b. Note both curves are

scaled by their maximum values and show similar variations with K I I /(K I + K I I ). If one accepts the MTS

assumption for the mixed-mode, the highest circumferential stress under the given loading intensity appears

at around K I I /(K I + K I I ) 0.5, and so does the

cracking velocity. From the curves one may conclude

that the maximum crack propagation rate has to occur

under a mixed-mode condition.

7 Conclusions

In the present paper the formulation of the XFEM

and the CCZM have been discussed and applied for

the analysis of mixed-mode fatigue cracking. Both

123

164

implementation and verification of CCZM in combination with XFEM in the frame of ABAQUS have been

reported. Application of XFEM allows displacement

discontinuities within finite elements so that the curved

crack propagation can be simulated with less effort.

The combination of XFEM and CCZM possesses an

appealing ability to predict the fatigue crack curvilinear extension under mixed-mode loading.

Based on the modified boundary layer formulation, a

detailed investigation has been conducted regarding the

crack propagation direction under mixed mode loading. Compared with known experimental results, the

nonlocal stress based maximum principal stress criterion of the XFEM accurately predicts crack propagation behavior in brittle materials. Moreover, the

computation shows that the initial crack kinking angle

differs from the stabilized crack direction. The transient region, however, is very small. These computations agree with known experimental data.

Additional computations based on a modified Findleys multi-axial fatigue criterion reveal that Findleys

model approaches experimental observations only with

very small shear stress contribution. This implies that

this kind of criterion is only suitable for considering

shear stress contribution, for fatigue crack propagation

in ductile materials.

In fatigue analysis the crack propagation rate is

another important issue. In this context the fatigue crack

rate prediction under mixed mode loading in the framework of XFEM combined with CCZM has been investigated as well. The numerical simulation shows that

the computational results match the known form of

Paris law under mixed mode condition. Additionally,

simulations verify the proposed method is able to simulate the crack initiation and steady propagation process for very low cycle problems. The computational

results in fatigue simulation coincide with the experimental records in higher loading levels. For finite cycle

fatigue the evolution of damage accumulation predicts over-proportional increment of damage indicator.

This implies that the damage evolution equation needs

further modifications.

Although the results obtained so far are important and many experimental phenomena can be

simulated properly, the main difficulties for the

application of the CCZM are in the formulation of

the cyclic damage evolution equation as well as in the

description of the shear stress failure. Especially in ductile materials the shear stress becomes significant in

123

Y. Xu, H. Yuan

cycle fatigue problem needs a robust method beyond

cycle-by-cycle computations. For engineering applications more detailed experimental and computational

verifications are necessary.

Acknowledgments The present work is financed by the

German Science Foundation (DFG) under the contract number

YU119/5-1.

References

ABAQUS (2006) Theory manual. Version 6.6. ABAQUS Inc.

Providence, R. I.

Anderson TL (1995) Fracture mechanicsfundamentals and

applications, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton

Belytschko T, Fish J, Engelmann BE (1988) A finite element

with embedded localization zones. Comp Meth Appl Mech

Eng 70:5989

Chen CR, Kolednik O, Heerens J, Fischer FD (2005) Threedimensional modelling of ductile crack growth: cohesive

zone parameters and crack tip triaxiality. Eng Fract Mech

72:20722094

De Borst R (2006) Modern domain-based discretization methods for damage and fracture. Int J Fract 138:241262

Erdogen F, Sih GC (1963) On the crack extension in plates under

plane loading and transverse shear. J Bas Eng ASME Trans

85:519525

Findley WN (1956) Modified theories of fatigue failure under

combined stress. Proc Soc Exp Stress Anal 14:3546

Jirasek M, Zimmermann T (2001) Embedded crack model. Part

I: basic formulation. Int J Num Meth Eng 50:12691290

Karolczuk A, Macha E (2005) A review of critical plane orientations in multiaxial fatigue failure criteria of metallic

materials. Int J Fract 134:267304

Krull H, Yuan H (2009) Suggestions to cohesive models based

on atomistic simulations. Eng Fract Mech. Submitted for

publication

Larsson SG, Carlsson AJ (1973) Influence of non-singular stress

terms and specimen geometry on small-scale yielding at

crack tips in elastic-plastic materials. J Mech Phy Solids

21:263277

Lemaitre J (1996) A course on damage mechanics. Springer,

Berlin

McDiarmid DL (1994) A shear stress based critical-plane criterion of multiaxial fatigue failure for design and life prediction. Fat Fract Eng Mat Struct. 14751485

Melenk JM, Babska I (1996) The partition of unity finite element method: basic theory and applications. Comp Meth

Appl Mech Eng 139:289314

Meschke G, Dumstorff P (2007) Energy-based modeling of

cohesive and cohesionless cracks via X-FEM. Comp Meth

Appl Mech Eng 196:23382357

Mergheim J, Kuhl E, Steinmann P (2005) A finite element

method for the computational modelling of cohesive cracks.

Int J Num Meth Eng 63:276289

Nguyen O, Repetto EA, Ortiz M, Radovitzky RA (2001) A cohesive model of fatigue crack growth. Int J Fract 110:351369

Oden JT, Duarte CA, Zienkiewicz OC (1998) A new cloudbased hp finite element method. Comp Meth Appl Mech

Eng 153:117126

Qian J, Fatemi A (1996) Mixed mode fatigue crack growth: a

literature survey. Eng Fract Mech 55:969990

Richard HA (1984) Some theoretical and experimental aspects

of mixed mode fracture. In: Valluri SR, Taplin DMR, Rama

Rao P et al., (eds) Advances in fracture research. Pergamon

Press, Oxford

Richard HA (1985) Bruchvorhersage bei berlagerter Normalund Schubbeanspruchung von Rissen. VDI, Dsseldorf

Richard HA (1989) Specimens for investigating biaxial fracture

and fatigue processes. In: Brown MW, Miller KJ (eds) Biaxial and multiaxial fatigue. Mechanical Engineering Publications, London pp 227229

Roe KL, Siegmund T (2003) An irreversible cohesive zone

model for interface fatigue crack growth simulation. Eng

Fract Mech 70:209232

Sander M, Richard HA (2006) Experimental and numerical

investigations on the influence of the loading direction on

the fatigue crack growth. Int J Fatigue 28:583591

Scheider I, Schdel M, Brocks W, Schnfeld W (2006) Crack

propagation analyses with CTOA and cohesive model:

comparison and experimental validation. Eng Fract Mech

73:252263

Siegmund T (2004) A numerical study of transient fatigue crack

growth by use of an irreversible cohesive zone model. Int J

Fatigue 9:929939

Simone A, Wells GN, Sluys LJ (2003) From continuous to discontinuous failure in a gradient-enhanced continuum damage model. Comp Meth Appl Mech Eng 192:45814607

Socie DF, Marquis GB (2000) Multiaxial fatigue. SAE International, Warrendala

Tan H, Liu C, Huang Y, Geubelle PH (2005) The cohesive law

for the particle/matrix inter-faces in high explosives. J Mech

Phy Solids 53:18921917

165

Wells GN, Sluys LJ (2001) A new method for modelling cohesive cracks using finite elements. Int J Num Meth Eng

50:26672682

Xu XP, Needleman A (1994) Numerical simulations of fast

crack growth in brittle solids. J Mech Phy Solids 42:1397

1434

Xu YJ, Yuan H (2009a) Computational analysis of mixedmode fatigue crack growth in quasi-brittle materials using

extended finite element methods. Eng Fract Mech 76:

165181

Xu YJ, Yuan H (2009b) On damage accumulations in the cyclic

cohesive zone model for XFEM analysis of mixed-mode

fatigue crack growth. Comp Mat Sci. (in print)

Yuan H (2002) Numerical assessments of cracks in elastic-plastic materials. Springer, Berlin

Yuan H, Cornec A (1990) Application of cohesive zone model

in investigation of elastic-plastic crack growth. In: Zarka

J et al., (ed) STRUCENG & FEMCAD: structural engineering and optimization. IITT International, Gournay pp

317323

Yuan H, Lin G, Cornec A (1996) Applications of cohesive zone

model for assessment of ductile fracture processes. Trans

ASME: J Eng Mat Tech 118:192200

Yang B, Mall S, Ravi-Chandar K (2001) A cohesive zone model

for fatigue crack growth in quasibrittle materials. Int J Solids Struct 38:39273944

Zhai J, Tomar V, Zhou M (2004) Micromechanical simulation of

dynamic fracture using the cohesive finite element method.

J Eng Mater Tech 126:179191

Zi G, Belytschko T (2003) New crack-tip elements for XFEM

and applications to cohesive cracks. Int J Numer Methods

Eng 57:22212240

Zi G, Chen H, Xu J, Belytschko T (2005) The extended finite

element method for dynamic fractures. Shock Vibr 12:

923

123

- AWHEM Minutes 2009-12-08 - ApprovedDiunggah olehjamilvora
- 1851665676Diunggah olehthirumali muppur
- Fracture Mechanics, Schreus, 2012.pdfDiunggah olehCarlos Hernandez
- Vulnerable to Brittle FractureDiunggah olehZenon Kociuba
- Martinsson JDiunggah olehRusandi Noor
- 1-s2.0-0008884673900768-mainDiunggah olehEmanuel Carvalho
- Introduction to Fatigue Design April 09Diunggah olehhiyeon
- Template for Lab ReportDiunggah olehJoanna Simmons
- Guidelines and Parameter Selection for the Simulation of Progressive ionDiunggah olehmsyexplore
- Simulation Fatigue Lifecycle Prediction 15Diunggah olehSajid Zubair
- Fracture Analysis of Cracks in Orthotropic Materials Using AnsysDiunggah olehbiomechanics
- Size Effects in Concrete FractureDiunggah olehMohammed Alsaqi
- Cumulative Damage PredictionDiunggah olehgakonruby
- The Significance of Fatigue Crack Initiation for Predictions of the Fatigue Limit of Specimens and StructuresDiunggah olehBaran Yeter
- 14222Diunggah olehLeo Lonardelli
- (2013 Carloni; Subramaniam) Investigation of Sub-critical Fatigue Crack Growth in FRPDiunggah olehHamilton Costa
- Effect of Welding and Weld Repair on Crack Propagation BehaviorDiunggah olehMohamed AbdelAziz
- Extended NT2F12 Call for PaperDiunggah olehCatalin Pruncu
- 11778 krunalDiunggah olehRam Langhe
- New Manasa M.tech Project JournalDiunggah olehkavya
- Variational Approach to FractureDiunggah olehmrmister001
- Does notch sensibility exist in environmentally assisted cracking (EAC)?Diunggah olehMona Awad
- 139_1Diunggah olehAman Chheda
- 3D Crack ModelingDiunggah olehmarianny
- Mechanism of Crack Growth in Lubricated Rolling- Sliding ContactDiunggah olehXu Weixing
- Contour Integral Evaluation of Centre Cracked Rectangular Panel Under Remote Tensile Stress and Thermal Stress Parametric StudyDiunggah olehesatjournals
- 2002Diunggah olehHuda Jawad
- Evaluation of Statistical Fracture Toughness Parameters on the Basis of Crack Arrest ExperimentDiunggah olehP R SREENIVASAN
- materials-12-02575-v2Diunggah oleh100offeer
- Relative Resource ManagerDiunggah olehMartina Richard

- Revo Uninstaller Pro HelpDiunggah olehAndrew Justine
- BD FACS Loader Reference ManualDiunggah olehTianxu Han
- Ismail ArfathDiunggah olehZubair Mohammed
- RM-MPU-6000ADiunggah olehVictor Lim
- Lesson Plan Wired and Wireless NetworksDiunggah olehTek Casonete
- [Wiley] Software Factories - Assembling Applications With Patterns, Models,Diunggah olehshalalau19
- FortiGate-200D-QuickStartDiunggah olehChu Gia Khôi
- components of project reportDiunggah olehambrosialnectar
- Divide And Conquer methodDiunggah olehpstephen0
- echosounder_gds101Diunggah olehrcmmaz
- UCS User Coordinate System in 3D - AutoCAD 2016 Tutorial and VideosDiunggah olehraju
- TPL-069-TTPL-TLUD004-ENG-ED-100000088-303- R2.pdfDiunggah olehrukmagoud
- PHP Exif Read Data - ManualDiunggah olehsaimon26
- 59807-ECard (1)Diunggah olehPravin SHINDE
- 03 Filter Pas IfDiunggah olehBasha Tahamal
- Lockbox BAI2 Layout With SAPDiunggah olehMafia333
- 124662293 How FedEx Enterprise Systems WorksDiunggah olehSafi UllahKhan
- Letter of IntentDiunggah olehnaeem05
- A Project to Identify Research and Community Project Themetic, Areas Arsi University School of LawDiunggah olehsamuel maireg Biresaw
- Sw Ek Tm4c123gxl Boost Capsense Ug 1.1Diunggah olehdadadalito
- Circuits 2Diunggah olehalanster5678
- Atmos Evaluation Edition Installation Guide a01Diunggah olehsorin_gheorghe20
- Line Current Differential Testing-A Practical ApproachDiunggah olehmentong
- Introduction to Imaging Modality2003Diunggah olehhendra2darmawan
- Adventure with Stack Smashing ProtectorDiunggah olehÁngelGarcíaJiménez
- 2_XBee.pdfDiunggah olehRadu Florin Tripon
- BVP B-CAT 2015 Information BrochureDiunggah olehNeepur Garg
- Understanding SCADA System Security VulnerabilitiesDiunggah olehrealdemocracynow
- Ssas Test ProceduresDiunggah olehSamarinerSingh
- CC1101Diunggah olehPhạm Thế Vũ