Talat - Fracture

TALAT Lecture 2403
Applied Fracture Mechanics

49 pages and 40 figures

Advanced Level

prepared by Dimitris Kosteas, Technische Universitt Mnchen

Objectives:

Teach the principles and concepts of fracture mechanics as well as provide
recommendations for practical applications

Provide necessary information for fatigue life estimations on the basis of fracture
mechanics as a complementary method to the S-N concept

Prerequisites:

Background in engineering, materials and fatigue required

Date of Issue: 1994
EAA - European Aluminium Association
TALAT 2403 2
2403 Applied Fracture Mechanics

Contents

2403.01 Historical Context ..................................................................................... 3
Fracture and Fatigue in Structures ...........................................................................3
2403.02 Notch Toughness and Brittle Fracture ................................................... 5
Notch-Toughness Performance Level as a Function of Temperature and Loading
Rates.........................................................................................................................5
Brittle Fracture.........................................................................................................8
2403.03 Principles of Fracture Mechanics............................................................ 9
Basic Parameters......................................................................................................9
Material Toughness ............................................................................................ 9
Crack Size ........................................................................................................... 9
Stress Level ......................................................................................................... 9
Fracture Criteria.....................................................................................................13
Members with Cracks ............................................................................................14
Stress Intensity Factors ..........................................................................................16
Deformation at the Crack Tip ................................................................................21
Superposition of Stress Intensity Factors...............................................................22
2403.04 Experimental Determination of Limit Values according to Various
Recommendations ................................................................................................... 23
Linear-Elastic Fracture Mechanics ........................................................................24
Experimental Determination of K
Ic
- ASTM-E399........................................... 24
Test procedure: ................................................................................................. 25
Elastic-Plastic Fracture Mechanics ........................................................................27
Crack opening displacement (COD) - BS 5762................................................ 27
Determination of R-Curves - ASTM-E561........................................................ 28
Determination of J
Ic
- ASTM-E813 .................................................................. 30
Determination of J-R Curves - ASTM-E1152.................................................. 33
Crack Opening Displacement (COD) Measurements - BS 5762...................... 34
2403.05 Fracture Mechanics Instruments for Structural Detail Evaluation... 36
Free Surface Correction F
s
....................................................................................37
Crack Shape Correction F
e
....................................................................................37
Finite Plate Dimension Correction F
w
..................................................................38
Correction Factors for Stress Gradient F
g
.............................................................38
Remarks on Crack Geometry.................................................................................39
2403.06 Calculation of a Practical Example: Evaluation of Cracks Forming at a
Welded Coverplate and a Web Stiffener .............................................................. 41
Coverplate..............................................................................................................42
Web Stiffener .........................................................................................................43
2403.07 Literature/References ............................................................................... 47
2403.08 List of Figures.......................................................................................... 48

TALAT 2403 3
2403.01 Historical Context
Fracture and fatigue in structures

In his first treatise on "Mathematical Theory of Elasticity" Love, 100 years ago, discus-
sed several topics of engineering importance for which linear elastic treatment appeared
inadequate. One of these was rupture. Nowadays structural materials have been im-
proved with a corresponding decrease in the size of safety factors and the principles of
modern fracture mechanics have been developed, mainly in the 1946 to 1966 period.

Fracture mechanics is the science studying the behaviour of progressive crack extension
in structures. This goes along with the recognition that real structures contain disconti-
nuities.

Fracture mechanics is the primary tool (characteristic material values, test procedures,
failure analysis procedures) in controlling brittle fracture and fatigue failures in struc-
tures. The desire for increased safety and reliability of structures, after some spectacular
failures, has led to the development of various fracture criteria. Fracture criteria and
fracture control are a function of engineering contemplation taking into account econo-
mical and practical aspects as well.

Fracture and Fatigue in Structures

Brittle fracture is a type of catastrophic failure that usually occurs without prior plastic
deformation and at extremely high speeds. Brittle fractures are not so common as fatigue
(the latter characterised by progressive crack development), yielding, or buckling
failures, but when they occur they may be more costly in terms of human life and prop-
erty damage. Fatigue failures according to statistics is responsible for approx. 7% of
failures.

Aristotle talked about hooks on molecules, breaking them meant fracture. Da Vinci and
Gallileo talked about fracture, too. The big break in fracture mechanics came in 1920
with the Griffith theory, applicable mostly to brittle materials, as well as Orowan and
Irwing and Williams in the 1940's.

Catastrophic brittle failures were recorded in the 19
th
and early 20
th
century. There
were several failures in welded Vierendeel-truss bridges in Europe shortly after being
put into service before World War II. However, it was not until the large number of
World War II ship failures that the problem of brittle fracture was fully appreciated by
engineers. 1962 the Kings Bridge in Melbourne failed by brittle fracture at low tempera-
tures due to poor details and fabrication resulting in cracks which were nearly through
the flange prior to any service loading. Although this failure was studied extensively,
bridge-builders did not pay particular attention until the failure of the Point Pleasent
Bridge in West Virginia, USA on December 15, 1965. This was the turning point initia-
ting the possibilities of fracture mechanics in civil engineering.

This failure was unique in several ways, it was investigated extensively and its results
were characteristic for the procedures and possibilities of fracture mechanics analysis.
Therefore they are mentioned briefly here:

TALAT 2403 4
(a) fracture appeared in the eye of an eyebar caused by the growth of a flaw to a criti-
cal size under normal working stresses,

(b) the initial flaw was caused through stress-corrosion cracking from the surface of
the hole, hydrogen sulphide was probably the reagent responsible,

(c) the chemical composition and heat treatment of the eyebar produced a steel with
very low fracture toughness at the failure temperature, and

(d) fracture resulted from a combination of factors and it would not have occurred in
the absence of anyone of these
- the high hardness of the material made it susceptible to stress corrosion
cracking
- close spacing of joint components made it impossible to apply paint to high
stressed regions yet provided a crevice where water could collect
- the high design load of the eyebar resulted in high local stresses at the inside
of the eye greater than the yield strength of the steel.
- the low fracture toughness of the steel led to complete fracture from the
slowly propagating stress corrosion crack when it had reached a depth of
only 3.0 mm

It has been shown that an interrelation exists between material, design, fabrication and
loading as well as maintenance. Fractures cannot be eliminated in structures by merely
using materials with improved notch toughness. The designer still has the fundamental
responsibility for the overall safety and reliability of the structure.

TALAT 2403 5
2403.02 Notch Toughness and Brittle Fracture

Notch-toughness performance level as a function of temperature
and loading rates
Brittle fracture

In the following chapters it will be shown how fracture mechanics can be used to de-
scribe quantitatively the trade-offs among stress, material toughness, and flaw size so
that the designer can determine the relative importance of each of them during design
rather than during failure analysis.

Notch-Toughness Performance Level as a Function of Temperature
and Loading Rates

The traditional mechanical property tests measure strength, ductility, modulus of elasti-
city etc. There are also tests available to measure some form of notch toughness. Notch
toughness is defined as the ability of a material to absorb energy (usually when loaded
dynamically) in the presence of a flaw. Toughness is defined as the ability of a smooth,
unnotched member to absorb energy (usually when loaded slowly).

Notch toughness is measured with a variety of specimens such as the Charpy-V-notch
impact specimen, dynamic tear test specimen K
Ic
, pre-cracked Charpy, etc. Toughness
is usually characterised by the area under a stress-strain curve in a slow tension test.
Notches or other forms of stress raisers make structural materials susceptible to brittle
fracture under certain conditions.

The ductile or brittle behaviour of some structural materials like steels is well known,
depending on several conditions such as temperature, loading rate, and constraint (the
latter arising often in welded components among other reasons due to residual stresses
and the complexity of welds). Ductile fractures are generally preceded by large amount
of plastic deformation occurring usually at 45 to the direction of the applied stress.
Brittle or cleavage fractures generally occur with little plastic deformation and are
usually normal to the direction of principal stresses. Figure 2403.02.01 shows the var-
ious fracture states and the transition from one to another depending on environmental
conditions.

Plane-strain behaviour refers to fracture under elastic stresses and is essentially brittle.
Plastic behaviour refers to ductile failure under general yielding conditions accompanied
usually, but not necessarily, with large shear lips. The transition between these two is
the elastic-plastic region or the mixed-mode region. Higher loading rates move the
characteristic transition curve to higher temperatures. A particular notch toughness value
called the nil-ductility transition (NDT) temperature generally defines the upper limits
of plane-strain behaviour under conditions of impact loading. In practice the question
has to be answered regarding the level of material performance which should be re-
quired for satisfactory performance in a particular structure at a specific service tem-
perature, see Figure 2403.02.02. In this example and for impact loading the three
different steels exhibit either plane-strain behaviour (steel 1) or elastic-plastic behaviour
(steel 2), or fully plastic behaviour (steel 3) at the indicated service temperature.
TALAT 2403 6
Although fully plastic behaviour would be a very desirable level of performance, it may
not be necessary or even economically feasible for many structures.

alu
Training in Aluminium Application Technologies
Notch-Thoughness Performance Levels
vs. Temperature
2403.02.01
L
e
v
e
l
s

o
f

p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

a
s

m
e
a
s
u
r
e
d
b
y

a
b
s
o
r
b
e
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

i
n

n
o
t
c
h
e
d

s
p
e
c
i
m
e
n
s
Plastic
Elastic -
Plastic
Plane
Strain
(Macro linear)
Elastic
Impact loading
Static loading
Intermediate
loading rate
NDT (Nil-Ductility Transition)
Temperature
D. Kosteas, TUM
Notch-Thoughness Performance Levels
vs. Temperature

alu
Relation between Performance and
Transition Temperature for three different Steel Qualities
Plastic
Elastic-
Plastic
Plane
Strain
L
e
v
e
l
s

o
f

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
Service Temperature
Steel 1 Steel 2 Steel 3
NDT
(Steel 3)
NDT
(Steel 2)
NDT
(Steel 1)
Temperature
D. Kosteas, TUM
2403.02.02

Not all structural materials exhibit a ductile-brittle transition. For example, aluminium
as well as very high strength structural steels or titanium do not undergo a ductile-brittle
transition. For these materials temperature has a rather small effect on toughness, see
Figure 2403.02.03.

TALAT 2403 7
alu
Notch-Toughness vs. Temperature
2403.02.03
+
+
+
+
+
+
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ISO - Probe
longitudinal
transverse
HAZ
filler
parent metal
x
+
Alloy 5083-H113
N
o
t
c
h

t
o
u
g
h
n
e
s
s

k
p
m
/

c
m
Temperature in C
6
4
2
0
20 0 -100 -200
D. Kosteas, TUM
}
Notch-Toughness of Welded Aluminium Alloy 5083
vs. Temperature

Notch toughness measurements express the behaviour and respective laboratory test re-
sults can be used to predict service performance. Many different tests have been used to
measure the notch toughness of structural materials. These include
Charpy-V notch (CVN) impact,
drop weight NDT
dynamic tear (DT)
wide plate
Battelle drop weight tear test (DWTT)
pre-cracked Charpy, etc.

Notch toughness tests produce fracture under carefully controlled laboratory conditions.
Hopefully, test results can be correlated with service performance to establish curves
like in Figure 2403.02.01 for various materials and specific applications. However,
even if correlations are developed for existing structures, they do not necessarily hold
for certain designs or new operating conditions or new materials. Test results are
expressed in terms of energy, fracture appearance, or deformation, and cannot always be
translated to engineering parameters.

A much better way to measure notch toughness is with the principles of fracture mech-
anics, a method characterising the fracture behaviour in structural parameters readily
recognised and utilised by the engineer, namely stress and flaw size. Fracture mechanics
is based on a stress analysis as described in the next chapters and can account for the ef-
fect of temperature and loading rate on the behaviour of structural members that have
sharp cracks.

Large and complex structures always have discontinuities of some kind. Dolan has made
the flat statement that "every structure contains small flaws" whose size and distribution
are dependent upon the material and its processing. These may range from non-metallic
inclusions and microvoids to weld defects, grinding cracks, quench cracks, surface laps,
etc. Fisher and Yen have shown that discontinuities exist in practically all structural
members, ranging from below 0.02 mm to several cm long. The significant point is that
TALAT 2403 8
discontinuities are present in fabricated structures even though the structure may have
been inspected. The problem of establishing acceptable discontinuities, for instance in
welded structures, is becoming an economic problem since techniques that minimize the
size and distribution of discontinuities are available if the engineer chooses to use them.
Whether a given defect is permissible or not depends on the extent to which the defect
increases the risk of failure of the structure. It is quite clear that this will vary with the
type of structure, its service conditions, and the material from which it is constructed.

The results of a fracture-mechanics analysis for a particular application (specimen size,
service temperature, and loading rate) will establish the combinations of stress level and
flaw size that would be required to cause fracture. The engineer can then quantitatively
establish allowable stress levels and inspection requirements so that fracture cannot
occur. Fracture mechanics can also be used to analyse the growth of small cracks, as for
example by fatigue loading, to critical size.

Fracture mechanics have definite advantages compared with traditional notch-toughness
tests. The latter are still useful though, as there are many empirical correlations between
fracture-mechanics values and existing toughness test results. In many cases, because of
the current limitations on test requirements for measuring fracture toughness K
Ic
exist-
ing notch-toughness tests must be used to help the designer estimate K
Ic
values.

Brittle Fracture

The number of catastrophic brittle fractures have been very small generally. Especially
for aluminium, exhibiting rather high fracture toughness values over the whole
temperature regime, probability of failure is low. Nonetheless, when
the design becomes complex,
thick welded plates from high strength materials are used
cost minimisation for the structure becomes more significant
the magnitude of loading increases, and
actual factors of safety decrease because of more precise computer designs,
the possibility of brittle fracture in large complex structures must be considered.

TALAT 2403 9
2403.03 Principles of Fracture Mechanics
Basic parameters
Fracture criteria
Members with cracks
Stress intensity factors
Deformation at the crack tip
Superposition of stress intensity factors

Basic Parameters

Numerous factors like service temperature, material toughness, design, welding, residual
stresses, fatigue, constraint, etc., can contribute to brittle fractures in large structures.
However, there are three primary factors in fracture mechanics that control the
susceptibility of a structure to brittle fracture:
1) Material toughness K
c
, K
Ic
, K
Id

2) Crack size a
3) Stress level

Material Toughness
is the ability to carry load or deform plastically in the presence of a notch and can be
described in terms of the critical stress-intensity factor under conditions of plane stress
K
c
or plane strain K
Ic
for slow loading and linear elastic behaviour or K
Id
under con-
ditions of plane strain and impact or dynamic loading, also for linear elastic behaviour.
For elastic-plastic behaviour, i.e. materials with higher levels of notch toughness than
linear elastic behaviour, the material toughness is measured in terms of parameters such
as R-curve resistance, J
Ic
, and COD as described later on.

Crack Size
Fracture initiates from discontinuities or flaws. These can vary from extremely small
cracks within a weld arc strike to much larger or fatigue cracks, or imperfections of
welded structures like porosity, lack of fusion, lack of penetration, toe or root cracks,
mismatch, overfill angle, etc. Such discontinuities, though even small initially, can grow
by fatigue or stress corrosion to a critical size.

Stress Level
Tensile stresses (nominal, residual, or both) are necessary for brittle fractures to occur.
They are determined by conventional stress analysis techniques for particular structures.
Further factors such as temperature, loading rate, stress concentrations, residual stresses,
etc., merely affect the above three primary factors. Engineers have known these facts for
many years and controlled the above factors qualitatively through good design (adequate
sections, minimum stress concentrations) and fabrication practices (decreased
imperfection or discontinuity size through proper welding and inspection), as well as the
use of materials with sufficient notch toughness levels.
TALAT 2403 10

A linear elastic fracture mechanics technology is based upon an analytical procedure
that relates the stress field magnitude and distribution in the vicinity of a crack tip to the
nominal stress applied to the structure, to the size, shape, and orientation of the crack,
and to the material properties. In Figure 2403.03.01 are the equations that describe the
elastic stress field in the vicinity of a crack tip for tensile stresses normal to the plane of
the crack (Mode I deformation).

alu
Elastic Stress Field Distribution near a Crack
2403.03.01
Nominal
stress
y
x
Magnitude of stress
along x axis,
y
y
(
= 0)
y
x
Crack
tip
r
x
y
y = cos (1 + sin sin )
K
I
(2 r)
1/2
3
2
2
x = cos (1 - sin sin )
K
I
(2 r)
1/2
3
2
2
Elastic Stress Field Distribution near a Crack
Source: Irwin and Williams, 1957

The equations describing the crack tip stress field distribution were formulated by Irwin
and Williams (1957) as follows:

x
I
K
r
=
|
\
|
.
|
2
2
1
2
3
2
cos sin sin

y
I
K
r
= +
|
\
|
.
|
2
2
1
2
3
2
cos sin sin

xy
I
K
r
=
2 2 2
3
2
sin cos cos

xz yz
= = 0

z
= 0 Plane Stress (thin sheet)

( )

z x y
= + Plane Strain (thick sheet)

The distribution of the elastic stress field in the vicinity of the crack tip is invariant in all
structural components subjected to this type of deformation. The magnitude of the
elastic stress field can be described by a single parameter, K
I
, designated the stress in-
tensity factor. The applied stress, the crack shape, size, and orientation, and the struc-
tural configuration of structural components subjected to this type of deformation affect
the value of the stress intensity factor but do not alter the stress field distribution. This
allows to translate laboratory results directly into practical design information. Stress in-
tensity values for some typical cases are given in Figure 2403.03.02.

TALAT 2403 11
alu
Training in AluminiumApplication Technologies
K
I
values for various crack geometries
2403.03.02
2 a
Through thickness crack
a
2 c
a
K
I
Values for Various Crack Geometries
K a
I
= K a
I
= 112
K
a
Q
I
= 112
Surface crack
where Q = f(a/2c,
)
Edge crack

It is a principle of fracture mechanics that unstable fracture occurs when the stress in-
tensity factor at the crack tip reaches a critical value K
c
. For mode I deformation and for
small crack tip plastic deformation, i.e. plane strain conditions, the critical stress in-
tensity factor for fracture for fracture instability is K
Ic
. The value K
Ic
represents the
fracture toughness of the material (the resistance to progressive tensile crack extension
under plane strain conditions) and has units of MN/m
3/2
(or MPa/mm
1/2
or ksiin).

1ksiin = 34.7597 N/mm
3/2
or MPa/mm
1/2

{1ksi = 6.89714 N/mm
2
or MPa}

This material toughness property depends on the particular material, loading rate, and
constraint:

K
c
critical stress intensity factor for static loading and plane stress conditions of
variable constraint. This value depends on specimen thickness and
geometry, as well as on crack size.
K
Ic
critical stress intensity factor for static loading and plane strain conditions of
maximum constraint. This value is a minimum value for thick plates.
K
Id
critical stress intensity factor for dynamic (impact) loading and plane strain
conditions of maximum constraint.

TALAT 2403 12
where
K K K C a
c Ic Id
, , =

C = constant, function of specimen and crack geometry
= nominal stress
a = flaw size

Through knowledge of the critical value at failure for a given material of a particular
thickness and at a specific temperature and loading rate, tolerable flaw sizes for a given
design stress level can be determined. Or design stress levels may be determined that
can be safely used for an existing crack that may be present in a structure, see Figure
2403.03.03.

alu
2403.03.03
Relation between material toughness, flaw
size and stress
2
a
(Fracture zone)
K
C o
f to
u
g
h
e
r s
te
e
l
K
C
K
C
= critical value of K
I
K
I
= f(
!
, a)
!
f
!
0
a
0
a
f
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

Increasing flaw size, 2a

Relation between Material Toughness, Flaw
Size and Stress
Increasing material
toughness
(COD, J
Ic
, R)

In an unflawed structural member, as the load is increased the nominal stress increases
until an instability (yielding at
ys
) occurs. Similarly in a structural member with a flaw
as the load is increased ( or as the size of the flaw grows by fatigue or stress corrosion)
the stress intensity K
I
increases until an instability, fracture at K
Ic
, occurs. Another ana-
logy that helps to understand the fundamental aspects of fracture mechanics is the com-
parison with the Euler column instability, Figure 2403.03.04. To prevent buckling the
actual stress and L/r values must be below the Euler curve. To prevent fracture the act-
ual stress and flaw size must be below the K
c
level.

TALAT 2403 13
COLUMN RESEARCH COUNCIL
COLUMN STRENGTH CURVE
EULER CURVE
YIELDING
(a) COLUMN INSTABILITY
P
P
L
L/r
!
YS
!
! = !
YS
( )
c
E
L r
=
2
2
/
alu
YIELDING
(b) CRACK INSTABILITY
!
!
a
!
YS
!
! = !
YS
c
C
K
C a
=

2a
Source: Madison and Irwin
Analogy: Column Instability and Crack Instability 2403.03.04

The critical stress intensity factor K
Ic
represents the terminal conditions in the life of a
structural component. The total useful life N
T
of the component is determined by the
time necessary to initiate a crack N
I
and by the time to propagate the crack N
P
from
subcritical dimensions a
0
to the critical size a
c
. Crack initiation and subcritical crack
propagation are localised phenomena that depend on the boundary conditions at the
crack tip. Subsequently it is logical to expect that the rate of subcritical crack propaga-
tion depends on the stress intensity factor K
I
which serves as a single term parameter re-
presentative of the stress conditions in the vicinity of the crack tip. Fracture mechanics
theory can be used to analyse the behaviour of a structure throughout its entire life.

For materials that are susceptible to crack growth in a particular environment the K
Iscc
-
value is used as the failure criterion rather than K
Ic
. This threshold value K
Iscc
is the
value below which subcritical crack propagation does not occur under static loads in
specific environment. In the relationship between material toughness, design stress and
flaw size, Figure 2403.03.03, K
Iscc
replaces K
c
as the critical value of K
I
.

Fracture Criteria

A careful study of the particular requirements of a structure is the basis in developing a
fracture control plan, i.e. the determination of how much toughness is necessary and
adequate. Developing a criterion one should consider
service conditions such as temperature, loading, loading rate, etc.
the level of performance (plane strain, elastic-plastic, plastic)
consequences of failure

TALAT 2403 14
Developing a fracture control plan for a complex structure is very difficult. All factors
that may contribute to the fracture of a structural detail or failure of the entire structure
have to be identified. The contribution of each factor and the combination effect of dif-
ferent factors have to be assessed. Methods minimising the probability of fracture have
to be determined. Responsibility has to be assigned for each task that must be underta-
ken to ensure the safety and reliability of a structure.

A fracture control plan can be defined for a given application and cannot be extended
indiscriminately to other applications. Certain general guidelines pertaining to classes of
structures (such as bridges, ships, vehicles, pressure vessels, etc.) can be formulated.
The fact that crack initiation, crack propagation, and fracture toughness are functions of
the stress intensity fluctuation K
I
and of the critical stress intensity factor K
Ic
(where-
by the stress intensity is related to the applied nominal stress or stress fluctuation) de-
monstrates that a fracture control plan depends on
fracture toughness K
Ic
or K
c
of the material at the temperature and
loading rate of the application. The fracture toughness can be modified by
changing the material.
the applied stress, stress rate, stress concentration, and stress fluctuation.
They can be altered by design changes and fabrication.
the initial size of the discontinuity and the size and shape of the critical
crack. These can be controlled by design changes, fabrication, and
inspection.

Members with Cracks

Failure of structural members is caused by the propagation of cracks, especially in fati-
gue. Therefore an understanding of the magnitude and distribution of the stress field in
the vicinity of the crack front is essential to determine the safety and reliability of struc-
tures. Because fracture mechanics is based on a stress analysis, a quantitative evaluation
of the safety and reliability of a structure is possible.
Fracture mechanics can be subdivided into two general categories namely linear-elastic
and elastic-plastic. The following relationships and equations for stress intensity factors
are based on linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM).

It is convenient to define three types of relative movements of two crack surfaces. These
displacement modes, Figure 2403.03.05, represent the local deformation in an
infinitesimal element containing a crack form. Figure 2403.03.06 shows the coordinate
system and stress components ahead of a crack tip
TALAT 2403 15
alu
2403.03.05
Basic cracking modes
Mode I
Mode II
Mode III
x
y
z
x
y
z
x
y
z
Basic Modes of Cracking
alu
Coordinate System and Stress Components ahead
of a Crack Tip
2403.03.06
Leading edge of the crack
r
y
x
z
yz
xz
xy
Mode I is characterized by displacement of the two fracture surfaces perpendicular to

each other in opposite directions. Local displacements in the sliding or shear Mode II
and Mode III, the tearing mode, are the other basic types corresponding to respective
stress fields in the vicinity of the crack tips, Figure 2403.03.07. In any problem the
deformations can be treated as one or combination of these local displacement modes.
Respectively the stress field at the crack tip can be treated as one or a combination of the
three basic types of stress fields. For practical applications Mode I is the most important
since according to Jaccard even if a crack starts as a combination of different modes it
is soon transformed and continues its propagation to a critical crack under Mode I.
TALAT 2403 16
alu
2403.03.07 Stress Field Equations in the Vicinity of Crack Tips

x
I
K
r
=
|
\
|
.
|
2 2
1
2
3
2
cos sin sin

y
I
K
r
=
+
|
\
|
.
|
2 2
1
2
3
2
cos sin sin

xy
I
K
r
=
2 2 2
3
2
sin cos cos

xz yz
= = 0
u
K
G
r
I
=

(
+
|
\
|
.
|
2 2
1 2
2
1
2
2
cos sin
v
K
G
r
I
=

(

|
\
|
.
|
2 2
2 2
2
1
2
2
sin cos
w = 0

x
II
K
r
=
+
|
\
|
.
|
2 2
2
2
3
2
sin cos cos

xy
II
K
r
=
|
\
|
.
|
2 2
1
2
3
2
cos sin sin

y
II
K
r
=
2 2 2
3
2
sin cos cos
( )

z x y
= +

xz yz
= = 0
u
K
G
r
II
=

(
+
|
\
|
.
|
2 2
2 2
2
1
2
2
sin cos
v
K
G
r
II
=

(
+
|
\
|
.
|
2 2
1 2
2
1
2
2
cos sin
w = 0
xz
III
K
r
=
2 2
sin
yz
III
K
r
=
2 2
cos

x y z xy
= = = = 0
w
K
G
r
III
=

(
2 2
1
2
sin
u v = = 0
Stress Field Equations in the Vicinity of Crack Tips
Mode I
Mode II
Mode III
( )

z x y
= +
Dimensional analysis of the equations shows that the stress intensity factor must be
linearly related to stress and directly related to the square root of a characteristic length,
the crack length in a structural member. In all cases the general form the stress intensity
factor is given by

K f g a = ( )

where f(g) is a parameter that depends on the specimen and crack geometry.

Stress Intensity Factors

Various relationships between the stress intensity factor and structural component confi-
gurations, crack sizes, orientations, and shapes, and loading conditions can be taken out
of respective literature

[1] C.P. Paris and G.C. Sih, "Stress analysis of cracks" in "Fracture toughness testing
and its applications", ASTM STP No381, ASTM, Philadelphia 1965
[2] H. Tada, P.C. Paris and G.R. Irwing, ed., "Stress analysis of cracks handbook",
Del Research corporation, Hellertown, Pa. 1973
[3] G.C. Sih, "Handbook of stress intensity factors for researchers and engi-neers",
Institute of fracture and solid mechanics, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pa. 1973
Stress intensity factor for a through-thickness crack:Figure 2403.03.08

TALAT 2403 17
alu
Through-Thickness Crack
Finite Width Plate

2a
2b
SIF for Through-Thickness Crack 2403.03.08
Infinite Width Plate

Nominal Stress
2a
K a =
( ) ( ) ( )
[ ]
K a a b
I
= sec / 2
1
2
( ) ( ) ( )
[ ]
sec / a b 2
1
2
Tangent correction for finite width
a
b
0.074 1.00
0.207 1.03
0.275 1.05
0.337 1.08
0.410 1.12
0.466 1.16
0.535 1.22
0.592 1.29

Stress intensity factor for a double-edge crack: Figure 2403.03.09

alu
Double-Edge Crack
a
2b
SIF for Double-Edge Crack 2403.03.09
a
( ) ( ) ( ) [ ]
sec / a b 2
1
2
Tangent correction for finite width
a
b
0.074 1.00
0.207 1.03
0.275 1.05
0.337 1.08
0.410 1.12
0.466 1.16
0.535 1.22
0.592 1.29
( ) ( ) ( ) [ ]
K a a b
I
= 112 2
1
2
. sec /

TALAT 2403 18
Stress intensity factor for a single-edge crack: Figure 2403.03.10

alu
Single-Edge Crack
2b
SIF for Single-Edge Crack 2403.03.10
K
I
=1.12
a)
1/2
a
For a semi-finite edge-cracked specimen:
For a finite width edge-cracked specimen:
K
I
=
a)

f(a/b)
Correction factor for a single-edge crack
in a finite width plate
a/b f(a/b)
0.10 1.15
0.20 1.20
0.30 1.29
0.40 1.37
0.50 1.51
0.60 1.68
0.70 1.89
0.80 2.14
0.90 2.46
1.00 2.86

Stress intensity factor for cracks emanating from circular or elliptical holes: Figure
2403.03.11

alu
!
!
b
N
a
N
a
F
a
( ) K F
I
= , a
where =
a
a
and =
b
a
N
N
N

|
\
|
.
|
|
\
|
.
|
( ) F ,
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.40
Cracks Emanating from
Circular or Elliptical Holes
SIF for Cracks Emanating from Circular or Elliptical Holes
The stress intensity factor
in the case of a finite plate is
= 1.0 For a circular hole
2403.03.11
=
a
a
N
|
\
|
.
|

TALAT 2403 19
Stress intensity factor for a single-edge crack in beam in bending: Figure 2403.03.12

alu
Single-Edge Crack in Beam in Bending
SIF for Single-Edge Crack in Beam in Bending 2403.03.12
a
w
M M
( )
K
M
W a
f
a
W
I
=
|
\
|
.
|
6
3
2
W: Depth of the Beam
Correction factor for notched beams
a/W f(a/W)

0.05 0.36
0.10 0.49
0.20 0.60
0.30 0.66
0.40 0.69
0.50 0.72
>0.60 0.73

Stress intensity factor for an elliptical or circular crack in an infinite plate: Figure
2403.03.13

alu
!
!
a
a
c
c
"
Elliptical or Circular Crack in an Infinite Plate
SIF: Elliptical or Circular Crack in an Infinite Plate 2403.03.13
( )
K
a a
b
I
= +
|
\
|
.
|
(
(

3
2
0
2
2
2
1
4
sin cos

0
2 2
2
2
3
2
0
1
2
=
|
\
|
.
|
c a
c
d sin
The stress intensity factor at any point along the perimeter of elliptical or
circular cracks in an infinite body subjected to uniform tensile stress is
The point on the perimeter of the crack
is defined by the angle
and the elliptic integral
#
o
( ) For circular cracks, c = a = K a
I
2
1 2

When c and = 2 this case is reduced
to a through- thickness crack.
,

TALAT 2403 20
Stress intensity factor for a surface crack: Figure 2403.03.14

alu
Surface Crack
"Thumbnail Crack"
SIF: Surface Crack
!
2c
a
!
2403.03.14

0
2 2
2
2
0
2
3
2
1 =

c a
c
d sin
The stress intensity factor can be calculated
from the equations of elliptical crack using a
free surface correction factor of 1.12
and for the position =
/2
K
I
=

(
112
1
2
.
a
Q
with and the elliptic integral Q=
0
2
Q is regarded as a shape factor because its values
depend on a and c.
For values of Q see Figure 2402.03.15.

Flaw shape parameter: Figure 2403.03.15

alu
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.5
1.0
1.5 2.0 2.5
a/2c
Ratio
Flaw Shape Parameter, Q
2403.03.15

ys
= 0

ys
= 080 .

ys
= 060 .

ys
=10 .
2c
a

TALAT 2403 21
Deformation at the Crack Tip

The stress field equations show that the elastic stress at a distance r from the crack tip
(where r<<a) can be very large, see Figure 2403.03.16. In reality the material in this
region deforms plastically. A plastic zone surrounds the crack tip.

alu
Distribution of Stress in the Crack Tip Region 2403.03.16
Crack Tip
Elastic Stress Distribution
Stress Distribution
after Local Yielding
Plastic
Zone
!
YS
2r
Y
x
!

The size of the plastic zone r
y
can be estimated from the stress field equations for plane
stress conditions and setting
y
=
ys

r
K
y
ys
=
|
\
|
.
|
|
1
2
2

Following a suggestion by Irwin that the increase in tensile stress for plastic yielding
caused by plane strain elastic constraint is of the order of 3, we can estimate the size of
the plastic zone under plane strain conditions as
r
K
y
ys
=
|
\
|
.
|
|
1
6
2

The plastic zone along the crack front in a thick specimen is subjected to plane strain
conditions in the center portion of the crack front where w = 0 and to plane strain condi-
tion near the surface of the specimen where
z
= 0. That means that the plastic zone in
the center of a thick specimen is smaller than at the surface of the specimen, Figure
2403.03.17.
TALAT 2403 22
alu
2403.03.17
Plane stress
mode I
Plane
strain
mode I
Cracktip
Midsection
Surface
Crack tip
y
z
x
K
I
2
$ !
y
r
Ip
(plane strain)
z
r
p(Plane stress)
Plane strain region
Machine notch
Fatigue crack
Plastic zone
Plastic Zone Dimensions
A - Overall view
B - Edge view
Specimen cross-section

Superposition of Stress Intensity Factors

Stress components from such loads as uniform tensile loads, concentrated tensile loads,
or bending loads, all belonging to Mode I type loads, have the same stress field distribu-
tions in the vicinity of the crack tip according to the equations given in Figure
2403.03.07. Consequently the total stress intensity factor can be obtained by
algebraically adding the individual stress intensity factors corresponding to each load.

TALAT 2403 23
2403.04 Experimental Determination of Limit Values according to
Various Recommendations

Linear-Elastic Fracture Mechanics
Experimental determination of K
Ic
- ASTM-E399
Elastic-Plastic Fracture Mechanics
Crack opening displacement (COD) - BS 5762
Determination of R-Curves - ASTM-E561
Determination of J
Ic
- ASTM-E813
Determination of J-R Curves - ASTM-E1152
Crack opening displacement (COD) measurements - BS 5762

Structural materials have certain limiting characteristics, yielding in ductile materials or
fracture in brittle materials. The yield strength
ys
is the limiting value for loading
stresses, the critical stress intensity factors K
Ic
, K
Id
or K
c
are the limiting values for the
stress intensity factor K
I
. The critical stress intensity factor K
c
at which unstable crack
growth occurs for conditions of static loading at a particular temperature depends on
specimen thickness or constraint, Figure 2403.04.01.

alu
2403.04.01
Effect of Thickness on K
c
Plane stress
Plane strain
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
5.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.75 0.50 0.30 0.25
Thickness, in.
K
c
,

k
s
i

i
n
.
K
Ic
Thickness at the beginning
of plane strain is:
Effect of Thickness on K
c
t = 2.5
K
Ic
y
2
|
\
|
.
|

The limiting value of K
c
for plane strain (maximum constraint) conditions is K
Ic
(slow
loading rate) or K
Id
(dynamic or impact load). The K
Ic
-value is the minimum value for
plane strain conditions. The K
Ic
-value would also be a minimum value for conditions of
maximum structural constraint (for example, stiffeners, intersecting plates, etc.) that
TALAT 2403 24
might lead to plain-strain conditions even though the individual structural members
might be relatively thin.

Design procedures based on the K
Ic
-value provide a "conservative" approach to the
fracture problem. The following chapter gives information on experimental require-
ments and procedures for the measurement of K
Ic
-values.

For thin section problems further procedures based on a K
c
or R-curve analysis for
elastic-plastic behaviour problems an analysis on the basis of J
Ic
- or COD-procedures
will be described in further chapters.

Linear-Elastic Fracture Mechanics
Experimental Determination of K
Ic
- ASTM-E399

The accuracy with which K
Ic
describes the fracture behaviour of real materials depends
on how well the stress intensity factor represents the conditions of stress and strain in-
side the actual fracture process zone. This is the extremely small region just ahead of the
tip of a crack where crack extension would originate. In this sense K
I
is exact only in the
case of zero plastic strain as in brittle materials. For most structural materials, a
sufficient degree of accuracy may be obtained if the plastic zone ahead of a crack tip is
small in comparison with the region around the crack in which the stress intensity factor
yields a satisfactory approximation of the exact elastic stress field. The decision of what
is sufficient accuracy depends on the particular application. A standardised test method
must be reproducible, specimen size requirements are chosen so that there is essentially
no question regarding this point. The standardised test method for determining K
Ic
ma-
terial values is the ASTM-E399 test method.

alu
SE Bend Specimen and CT Tension Specimen
2.1W
2.1W
B
=W/2
W
a
1.25 W
W
0
.
6

W
0
.
6

W
0.275 W
0.275 W
0.25 W Dia.
a
B
=W/2
Compact Tension
Specimen
SE(B) Bend
Specimen
after ASTM-E399
2403.04.02

TALAT 2403 25
Several different test specimen forms have been proposed in the course of the de-
velopment and standardization. Two of the most common for engineering applications,
the bend specimen or SE(B) specimen and the compact tension or C(T) specimen are
reproduced in Figure 2403.04.02 according to ASTM-E399.

Test procedure:
Determine location and orientation of test specimen in respect to component to be
analysed: Specimen orientation L-S and L-T cover the most common crack cases in
structural engineering components, such as welded structures, see Figure 2403.04.03.
Surface cracks grow initially in the direction of the plate thickness and propagate further
on as through-thickness cracks.

alu
Specimen Orientation
2403.04.03
according to ASTM

Determine critical specimen size dimension: To fulfil requirements of maximum
constraint and small plastic zone in relation to specimen dimensions the following
relations must be observed.
a = crack depth > 2.5 (K
Ic
/
ys
)
2

B = specimen thickness > 2.5 (K
Ic
/
ys
)
2

W = specimen depth > 5.0 (K
Ic
/
ys
)
2

This leads for instance to a specimen thickness of approximately 50 times the radius of
the plane strain plastic zone.

Even before a K
Ic
test specimen can be machined, the K
Ic
value to be obtained must
already be known or at least estimated. Three general rules may be used
TALAT 2403 26
overestimate the K
Ic
value on the basis of experience with similar materials
and judgement based on other types of notch-toughness tests
use specimens that have as large as thickness as possible, namely a thickness
equal to that of the plates to be used in service
use the following ratio of yield strength to modulus of elasticity to select a
specimen size. These estimates are valid for very high strength structural
materials, steels having yield strength of at least 1000 MPa and aluminium
alloys having yield strength of at least 350 MPa.

ys
/E Minimum recommended
thickness and crack length
[mm]
0.0050-0.0057 75,0
0.0057-0.0062 63,0
0.0062-0.0065 50,0
0.0065-0.0068 44,0
0.0068-0.0071 38,0
0.0071-0.0075 32,0
0.0075-0.0080 25,0
0.0080-0.0085 20,0
0.0085-0.0100 12,5
0.0100 or greater 6,5

Many low- to medium-strength structural materials in section sizes of interest for most
large structures (ships, bridges, pressure vessels) are of insufficient thickness to main-
tain plane strain conditions under slow loading and at normal service temperatures.
Thus, the linear elastic analysis to calculate K
Ic
values is invalidated by general yielding
and the formation of large plastic zones. Alternative methods must be used for fracture
analysis as described in further chapters.

The following values are given as an example for common aluminium alloys

K
I

MPa
0,2

MPa
K
I
/
0,2

2.5(K
Ic
/
0,2
)
2

AlMgSi1 50 245 0,0416 104
AlZn4,5Mg1 73 370 0,0389 97

Select and prepare a test specimen: Most probably one of the two standard specimen
shapes will be selected, slow-bend test specimen or compact-tension specimen. The
initial machined crack length 'a' should be 0.45 W so that the crack can be extended by
fatigue to approximately 0.5 W. Usually the selection of the specimen thickness B is
made first.

Perform test following requirements of ASTM-E399 procedure: This includes initial
fatigue cracking of the test specimen. Measure and plot crack opening displacement v
against load P.

TALAT 2403 27
Analyse P-v record, calculate conditional K
Ic
(=K
Q
) values, perform validation check
for K
Ic
: If the K
Q
values meet the above stated requirements, like a or B 2.5(K
Q
/
0.2
)
and W 5.0(K
Q
/
0.2
)
2
, the K
Q
=K
Ic
. If not the test is invalid, the results may be used
to estimate the material toughness only.

Elastic-Plastic Fracture Mechanics

Elastic-plastic fracture mechanics analysis is an extension of the linear elastic analysis.
As already mentioned low- to medium-strength structural materials used in the section
sizes of interest for large complex structures are of insufficient thickness to maintain
plane strain conditions under slow loading conditions at normal service temperatures.
Large plastic zones from ahead of the crack tip, the behaviour is elastic-plastic, invali-
dating the calculation of K
Ic
values. There are three possible approaches into the elastic-
plastic region, through

crack opening displacement (COD)
R-curve analysis
J-integral

Crack opening displacement (COD) - BS 5762

Proposed by Wells in 1961 the fracture behaviour in the vicinity of a sharp crack could
be characterized by the opening of the notch faces, namely the crack opening displace-
ment. He also showed that the concept of crack opening displacement was analogous to
the concept of critical crack extension force and thus the COD values could be related to
the plane strain fracture toughness K
Ic
. COD measurements can be made even when
there is considerable plastic flow ahead of a crack. Using a crack tip plasticity model
proposed by Dugdale it is possible to relate the COD to the applied stress and crack
length.

As with the K
I
analysis the application of the COD approach to engineering structures
requires the measurement of a fracture toughness parameter
c
, the critical value of the
crack tip displacement, which is a material property as a function of temperature,
loading rate, specimen thickness, and possibly specimen geometry, i.e. notch acuity,
crack length and overall specimen size.

Since the
c
-test is regarded as an extension of the K
Ic
testing the british standardized
test method after BS 5762 is very similar to the ASTM-E399 test method for K
Ic
.
Similar specimen preparation, fatigue-cracking procedures, instrumentation, and test
procedures are followed. The displacement gage is similar to the one used in K
Ic
testing
(Clip-Gage) and a continous load-displacement record is obtained during the test.
On the basis of the British Standard PD 6493 an analysis results is based on the
comparison of the critical COD value
c
to the actual crack tip opening displacement of
the component analyzed and characterized by geometrical dimensions of the component
TALAT 2403 28
and the existing flaw and its location, as well as the material used - for a specific service
temperature and loading rate.
Determination of R-Curves - ASTM-E561

K
Ic
is governed by conditions of plane strain (
z
=0) with small scale crack tip plasticity.
K
c
is governed by conditions of plane stress (
z
=0) with large scale crack tip plasticity.
K
c
values are generally 2-10 times larger than K
Ic
. K
Ic
values depend on only two
variables, temperature and strain rate. K
c
values depend on 4 variables, temperature,
loading rate, plate thickness and initial crack length.

Plane stress conditions rather than plane strain conditions actually exist in service. Plane
stress fracture toughness evaluations using an R-curve or resistance curve analysis as
one of several extensions of linear elastic fracture mechanics into elastic-plastic fracture
mechanics is envisaged. An R-curve characterizes the resistance to fracture of a material
during incremental slow stable crack extension. An R-curve is a plot of crack growth
resistance as a function of actual or effective crack extension. K
R
, also in MPam units
is the crack growth resistance at a particular instability condition during the R-curve
test, i.e. the limit prior to unstable crack growth. In Figure 2403.04.04 the solid lines
represent the R-curves for different initial crack lengths. The dashed lines represent the
variation in K
I
with crack length for different constant loads P1<P2<P3. Each line is a
function of the crack length, K
I
= f(P,a).

alu
2403.04.04
R-Curves and Critical Fracture Toughness Values K
R
for Different Initial Cracks a
0
K
R
a
P
2
P
3
Applied
K
I
Levels
a
1
a
2
K
R
= K
c
for a
0
= a
2
K
R
= Kc
for a
0
= a
1
K
R
< K
c
for a
0
= a
1
R-Curves
a
actual
a
actual
K P,
I
= f ( ) a
P
1
<P
2
<P
3

The two points of tangency represent points of instability, or the critical plane stress
intensity factor K
c
= K
R
, at the particular crack length and, of course, for the given
conditions of temperature and loading rate. The K
R
value is always calculated by using
the effective crack length a
eff
and is plotted against the actual crack extension a
act
, that
takes place physically in the material during the test.

TALAT 2403 29
R-curves can be determined either by load control or displacement control tests. The
load control technique can be used to obtain only that portion of the R-curve up to the
K
c
value where complete unstable fracture occurs. The displacement control technique
can be used to obtain the entire R-curve. The evaluation of R-curves for relatively low-
strength, high-toughness alloys exhibiting large scale crack tip plasticity
y
at fracture,
relative to the test specimen in plane dimensions W and a, requires an elastic-plastic
approach. Here the crack-opening displacement at the physical crack tip is measured
and used in calculating the equivalent elastic K value. This elastic-plastic crack model is
designated the crack-opening-stretch (COS) method, where and COS are equivalent
terms. This method can be used with either a load-control or displacement control test.

A standardized testing procedure is available after ASTM-E561. Generally the thickness
of a test specimen is equal to the plate thickness considered for actual service. The other
dimensions are made considerably larger. The advantage of the displacement control
technique is partially offset by the necessity for new or unique loading facilities and
sophisticated instrumentation, whereas the load-control method in conjunction with
relatively simple measuring devices can be used with a conventional tension machine.

The limits of application of this technique are for materials with high strength with low
toughness, small plastic zone ahead of the crack tip. For materials with high levels of
toughness this analysis becomes increasingly less accurate.

The R-curve is determined by graphical means. A series of secant lines are constructed
on the load displacement record from a test sample. The compliance values /P from
these second lines are used to determine the associated a
eff
/W-values that reflect the
effective crack length a
eff
= a
0
+ a + r
y
using also an appropriate relationship for the
given specimen between crack opening and effective crack length. Each a
eff
/W-value is
then used to determine a respective K
eff
-value, the latter is plotted against a
eff

producing the R-curve for the given material.

The significance of the critical fracture toughness values obtained from an R-curve ana-
lysis is in the calculation of the critical flaw size a
cr
required to cause fracture
instability. A normalised plot showing the general relationship of a
cr
to such design
parameters, nominal design stress and yield stress, for a large center-cracked tension
specimen subjected to uniform tension is given in Figure 2403.04.05.

The plot can be used for any material for which valid fracture mechanics results (K
Ic
,
K
Id
, K
c
, K
Iscc
) are available under a given loading rate, temperature and state of stress.

TALAT 2403 30
alu
Normalized Plot for Critical Flaw Size
2403.04.05
10.0
8.0
5.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.80
0.50
0.30
0.20
= 0.10
( )
K
C
YS
100
40
20
10
4
2
1.0
0.4
0.2
0.10
0.04
0.02
0.010
0.004
0.002
0.001
1.00 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0
a
c
r
,

c
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

f
l
a
w

s
i
z
e
,

i
n
c
h
e
s
( )
D
YS
a
cr
2a
cr
D
D
K
I
=
D

a
cr
=
1
2
( )
K
C
D
Normalized Plot for Critical Flaw Size

Determination of J
Ic
- ASTM-E813

Another means of directly extending fracture mechanics concepts from the linear-elastic
behaviour to the elastic-plastic behaviour is the path independent J-integral proposed by
Rice as a method of characterizing the stress strain field at the tip of a crack by an
integration path taken sufficiently far from the crack tip to be substituted for a path close
to the crack tip region.

For linear elastic behaviour the J-interal is identical to the energy release rate G per unit
crack extension. Therefore a J-failure criterion for the linear elastic case is identical to
the K
Ic
-failure criterion, under linear-elastic plane strain conditions.

( )
J G
K
E
Ic Ic
Ic
= =
1
2 2

The energy line integral J is defined for either elastic or elastic-plastic behaviour

J W dy T
U
x
dx
R
=

where R=any contour around the crack tip. Figure 2403.04.06 shows the crack-tip
coordinate system and arbitrary line integral contour. Note the counterclockwise
evaluation starting from the lower flat notch surface.
TALAT 2403 31
alu
Note the counterclockwise evaluation
starting from the lower flat notch surface.
R
r
y
x
n
J - Integral 2403.04.06
J W dy T
U
x
dx
R
=
The energy line integral J is defined for an

arbitrary contour R around the crack tip for
either elastic or elastic-plastic behaviour.
W = the strain energy density
T = the traction vector according to
the outward normal n along R,
U = displacement vector
s = arc length along R
T n
i ij ij
=
J - Integral

W = the strain energy density
T = the traction vector according to the outward normal n along R, T
i
=
ij
n
j

U = displacement vector
s = arc length along R

The actual testing procedure is standardized in ASTM-E813 and either a family of load
displacement records for different initial crack sizes or a single specimen (i.e. same
initial crack size) may be used.

Using a compliance method several specimens of varying crack length are used to
obtain P vs. curves. Values of energy per unit thickness (area under the P- curve) are
obtained for different initial crack lengths at various values of deflection . The slopes
of these curves are the changes in potential energy per unit thickness per unit change in
crack length and thus are equal to values of
J
B
U
a
=
1

See Figure 2403.04.07 for an illustrative interpretation of the J integral.

Specimen forms and dimensions (bend, bar, C(T) or WOL specimen), testing equipment
and procedure are given in ASTM-E813.
TALAT 2403 32
alu
Interpretation of the J - Integral
P
B
a da
2403.04.07
P
a
a+da
JBda
J
U
=
1
B a
Using a compliance method several specimens of varying crack length are used to
obtain P vs.

curves.
Values of energy per unit thickness (area under the P-
curve) are obtained for different

initial crack lengths at various values of deflection
.
The slopes of these curves are the changes in potential energy per unit thickness
per unit change in crack length and thus are equal to values of J.
Interpretation of the J - Integral

For the data analysis, Figure 2403.04.08, calculate J values from the P vs. using
J=A/(B (W-a
0
)) f(a
0
/W), where f(a
0
/W) is a correction factor for the given
specimen form, for a three-point bending specimen f(a
0
/W) = 2. Plot J vs. a. Construct
the 'blunting' line J=2r' a, with '=(
ys
+
ult
). Draw the best fit line to the J vs.
cack-extension points. Include only the points where actual crack extension has occured,
see Figure 2403.04.09. Where crack extension appears only as a stretch zone the point
should fall along the blunting line.

alu
Procedure of J Measurement
Load
Displacement,
(Step 1)
Precrack
End
a
(Step 2)
J
J
Ic
Fit of Data Points
(Step 4) (Step 3)
J = 2
flow
a
a
J
a
2403.04.08

TALAT 2403 33
alu
Evaluation Procedure and Limits of J Measurement
Blunting Line
0.15 mm Offset
J

-

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
l

k
J
o
u
l
e
s
/
m
R-Curve Regression Line

1.5mm Offset
( eliminated data)
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
a
p
[ ] mm
( ) a min
p ( ) a max
p
2403.04.09
Evaluation Procedure and Limits of J Measurement

Eliminate all data points which lie above J
max
=b
0
'/15. Final verification of valid
results is performed by comparing specimen dimensions a, B, b
0
= W-a
0
as follows
( )
=
a B or b
J
Q
,
'
0
25

Determination of J-R Curves - ASTM-E1152

The J-R curve characterizes the resistance of metallic materials to slow stable crack
growth after initiation from a preexisting fatigue crack or other sharp flaw. The J-R can
be used as an index of material toughness for alloy design, material selection, and qual-
ity assurance. The J-R curve from bend type specimens defines the lower bound esti-
mates of J-capacity as a function of crack extension, and has been observed to be
conservative in comparison with those obtained with tensile loading specimen
configurations. The J-R curve can be used to assess the stability of cracks in structural
details in the presence of ductile tearing.

A testing procedure has been standardized in ASTM-E1152. The resistance curve is
measured and the J integral is estimated in a way analogous to ASTM-E813.

The maximum J integral for a specimen is given by the smaller of:

J
max
= b
0
'/20 or

J
max
= B '/20

TALAT 2403 34
Data points with J values exceeding Jmax should be eliminated. The maximum crack
extension capacity is given by

a
max
= 0.1 b
0

Crack Opening Displacement (COD) Measurements - BS 5762

A standardized testing procedure is given in BS 5762. The crack opening displacement
is measured on three-point bend specimens, see Figure 2403.04.10, and transformed
to a crack tip opening displacement . The crack extension values are measured on the
specimen fracture surface. A plot of COD values vs. these crack extension values a
allows the estimation of a critical value.

alu
S = 4W
4.5W
W
P
a
v
p
z
r(W-a) W
a
B=
W
2
after BS 5762
Hinge Model for a Standard Bending Specimen 2403.04.10
Measurements of COD

Values of are estimated by
c
=
u
=
m
=
i
=
K
E
W a
W a z
v
y
p
2 2
1
2
0 4
0 4 0 6
( ) , ( )
, ,
+ +

where
K
P S
B W
f
a
W
=
|
\
|
.
|
3 2 /

TALAT 2403 35
Depending on the form of the respective load-displaced curve 4 different critical values
are interpreted:

c
COD without stable crack extension, instable crack leading to fracture, partial
brittle fracture or pop-in in the P-v curve
u
COD with stable crack extension, instable crack leading to fracture fracture,
partial brittle fracture or pop-in in the P-v curve
i
COD at initiation of stable crack extension
m
COD at maximum load for P-v curves with an extended region of stable crack ex-
tension

Use specimen dimensions, especially thickness, similar to dimensions in service.

TALAT 2403 36
2403.05 Fracture Mechanics Instruments for Structural Detail
Evaluation

Free surface correction F
s

Crack shape correction F
e

Finite plate dimension correction F
w

Correction factors for stress gradient F
g

Remarks on crack geometry

In the structural component to be evaluated the existence of a crack-like flaw of given or
assumed dimensions is postulated. The stress field at the location of the flaw has to be
considered. Information on flaw size and orientation and loading have to be considered
through a fracture mechanics parameter, a, K, J, or value. For the material and its
service conditions, like temperature, environment, static or dynamic loading, the respec-
tive characteristic material value has to be estimated.

Failures in metal structures are most of the times due to the formation of one or more
cracks as a result of the repeated application of loads, i.e. fatigue. Under certain
environmental conditions, like corrosion, or due to fabrication conditions a flaw may be
present which will act as an initiating crack for a fatigue failure.

If a large crack exists in a structure because of fabrication or some other event, the de-
sign fatigue resistance curves are no longer applicable. The residual fatigue resistance in
these cases must be assessed by fracture mechanics models.

Complex details such as those in common use in most structural engineering structures,
especially but not only in welded structures, the stress intensity factor for a surface crack
of depth 'a', can be conveniently related to the well known expression for a central
through crack in an infinite plate by use of correction factors.

The correction factors modify a to account for effects of free surface F
s
, finite
width F
w
, non uniform stresses acting on the crack F
g
, and the crack shape F
e
. The re-
sulting stress intensity factor is expressed as

K F F F F a
e s w g
=

To evaluate fracture instability, the total sum of stresses due to residual welding or roll-
ing stresses, dead load, and live loads must be considered. For cyclic fatigue loading,
is the live load variation in stress which results in a K stress intensity value range.

For the correction factors, solutions both empirical and exact can be found in the
literature. For common cases in engineering practice the following expressions are
stated.

TALAT 2403 37
Free Surface Correction F
s

In a semi-elliptical surface crack in a plate subjected to uniform stress

F a c
s
= 1211 0186 . .

The accuracy is 1.5% for 0.2 < (a/c) < 0.4. The ratio (a/c)0.3 has been observed with
the welded aluminium beams of the TUM fatigue program. This value has been reported
as a lower limit for steel weldments as well.

Crack Shape Correction F
e

Integral transformation of a 3-dimensional elliptical crack shape has resulted in the
elliptical crack shape correction factor,
F
e
= 1/E(k)
for the point of maximum stress intensity on the ellipse, where
( )
E k k d
o
( ) sin =
1
2 2
2

with
k
c a
c
2
2 2
2
=

i.e. dependent only upon the ratio of the minor to the major axis semi-diameter ratio a/c.
Values of F
e
for respective values of k
2
can be taken from the curve in Figure
2403.05.01.

alu
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
k
2
F
e
Crack Shape Correction Factor F
e
2403.05.01
Crack Shape Correction Factor F
e
( )
E k k d
o
( ) sin =
1
2 2
2

k
c a
c
2
2 2
2
=
F E k
e
=1 ( ) where with

TALAT 2403 38
Relationships for a/c have been empirically determined for different structural geome-
tries and are given in Figure 2403.05.02. The lower boundary for stiffeners is given
with c a = 1403
0 951
.
.
mm. The lower boundary for coverplates is given with
c a = 5 451
1 133
.
.
mm. For the above mentioned mean value a/c = 0.3 the respective F
e

value is F
e
= 0.912.

alu
C = 1.296 a
0.946
(mm)
C = 1.403 a
0.951
(mm)
C = 3.355 + 1.29a (mm)
C = 1.489 a
1.241
(mm)
C = 1.088 a
0.946
(in.)
C = 1.197 a
0.951
(in.)
C = 0.132 + 1.29a (in.)
C = 3.549 a
1.133
(in.)
C = 5.451 a
1.133
(mm)
C = 3.247 a
1.241
(in.)
Stiffeners
Coverplates
Crack Depth, a (mm)
a/c
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 2 4 6 8
0.1 0.2 0.3 a (in.)
Source: Fisher, steel structures
Crack Shape Measurements
2403.05.02

Finite Plate Dimension Correction F
w

For a central crack in a plate of finite width the correction factor is (see also under
Lecture 2403.03):

( ) ( ) ( )
[ ]
F a b
w
= sec / 2
1 2

or for a double edge crack in a plate of finite width

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
[ ]
F b a a b
w
= 2 2
1 2
/ tan /

with an accuracy of 0.3% for (a/b)<0.7.

Correction Factors for Stress Gradient F
g

Expressions for the stress gradient correction factor F
g
can be very complex and often
require a procedure involving first determining the stress field with finite elements in
the uncracked structure and then removing these stresses from the crack surface by inte-
TALAT 2403 39
gration. An outline for this procedure is given in "Albrecht/Yamada: Rapid Calculation
of SIF, Journal Struct. Division ASCE, Vol 103, No ST2, Feb 1977". Approximate
equations for the factor F
g
have been derived for several details.

One approximate method which appears applicable to a number of details such as stiffe-
ners, attachments, coverplates and gussets states that

F
K
G
g
tm
=
+ 1

with = a/t and K
tm
= maximum SIF at weld toe. Characteristic values for G and and
expressions for K
tm
can be taken from Figure 2403.05.03.

alu
Representative Values for G,
"
and K
tm
Source: Albrecht/Yamada
Web Gusset
Type of Detail
Z
t
f
t
cp
t
g
W
W
g
R > 25 mm
t
f
L
L
W
f
t
f
t
w
G
"
Gusset Plates
with Radius
Transition
Coverplated
Beam
Stiffener and
Short Attachment
2.776 0.2487
6.789 0.4348
0.862 0.60
0.88 0.576
2403.05.03
for web stiffeners:
K
tm
= 1.621*log(z/t
f
) + 3.963
for coverplates:
K
tm
= -3.539*log(z/tf)
+ 1.981*log(t
cp
/t
f
) + 5.798
for gussets with R>25mm:
K
tm
= -1.115*log(R/W)
+ 0.537*log(L/W)
+ 0.138*log(W
g
/W)
+ 0.285*log(t
g
/t
f
)+0.68
K
tm

For groove welds (butt welds) with the reinforcement in place (Gurney)

( ) F a
g
b
=
2 5 .

where ( ) ( ) b h = + 1 2 3 1 0 06 . log . and a = 2a/t, h is the acute angle between the plate
surface and the tangent to the weld profile.

Remarks on Crack Geometry

Cracks emanating from internal discontinuities in welds quickly assume a circular
shape. Even very irregularly shaped discontinuities (pores, inclusions) may be modelled
as either an ellipse growing into a circular shaped crack or the initial discontinuity may
be considered as a circumscribed circle.

TALAT 2403 40
Cracks forming and growing at the weld toe will be generally modelled as semi-ellipti-
cal surface cracks. Multiple cracks will occur along the weld toe of a transverse weld,
such as weld toes of coverplates and stiffeners welded to the flange of a girder. These
small single cracks are usually located closely to each other and initially tend to grow
into a semi-circular shape, but eventually the cracks begin to coalesce. Coalescence of
single cracks into a merged crack has been observed to occur at crack depths as small as
1.27 mm. Typical initial discontinuities will be approximately 0.38 mm to 1.52 mm long
and up to 0.76 mm deep, see Figure 2403.05.02. The following expression for the crack
length 'c' may be used an approximate lower boundary of measured coverplated beams

c a = 5462
1 133
.
.

where 2c is the width of the coalesced multiple crack.

Finally Figure 2403.05.04 shows a plot of the correction factors as a function of crack
size for a coverplated beam. It can be seen that small cracks are significantly affected by
the stress gradient correction factor F
g
. This also contributes to the spread in the crack
width and the early coalescence of the individual flaws. F
g
tends to decay rapidly and is
not a significant factor for larger cracks.

alu
Correction Factors vs. Crack Size for Coverplates
Correction Factors vs. Crack Size for Coverplates
C
o
r
r
e
c
t
i
o
n

F
a
c
t
o
r
s
F
g
F
s
F
w
F
e
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0 0.5 1.0
= a/t
f
2403.05.04

TALAT 2403 41
2403.06 Calculation of a Practical Example: Evaluation of Cracks
Forming at a Welded Coverplate and a Web Stiffener
Coverplate
Web stiffener

For an existing crack in a structural component the residual fatigue resistance may be
assessed by fracture mechanics. The crack is modelled as above and the stress intensity
range estimated as
K F F F F a
e s w g e
=
where
e
is the equivalent constant stress range calculated from random or spectrum
stress amplitudes through a damage accumulation assumption.

The cycles and time required to propagate a crack ai to some larger crack af can be esti-
mated as
N N dN
da
C K
p
N
N
m
a
a
i
f
i
f
= = =

It is also necessary to check the fracture resistance of the large crack. This is given by
K F F F F a K
e s w g c max max
=
when the crack tip is in a residual tension region,
max
=
y
.

Two different details of a welded aluminium beam are investigated, a coverplate and a
web stiffener, shown in Figure 2403.06.01.

alu
2403.06.01
Cover Plate Web Stiffener
Influence of Cover Plates and Web Stiffeners
Source: D. Kosteas, TUM

In both cases the crack extends into the heat affected zone. The crack propagation beha-
viour in this zone is assumed to be similar to the upper limit of the typical experimental
TALAT 2403 42
values for base material given in Figure 2404.06.03. Crack propagation da/dN in the
region of K
max
= K
c
above 10
-5
m/cycle is not taken into account, it corresponds to a
life portion in the low cycle fatigue region and may be neglected. The limiting value is
K
c
= K
Ic
= 60 MPam in the case of base metal of 10 mm thickness. Actually a reduc-
tion of 10% must be taken into account for values in the HAZ in 30 mm plate thickness.
Respective values for 15 mm flange thickness as in the above example are not available.
The ultimate strength limit for the material is 360 MPa. The size of initial flaws may be
taken as 0.1 mm, such as observed oxide inclusions in the fusion zone.

Coverplate

With the approximation c a = 5462
1 133
.
.
and a = 0.1 mm at the beginning of crack
propagation we get c = 0.402 and a/c = 0.250 and k
2

= 0.938 and consequently with F
e
=
0.933. With a = 15 mm and c = 117.5 mm at the approximate end of crack propagation
a/c = 0.128 and F
e
= 0.976. The surface correction F a c
s
= 1211 0186 . . = 1.118 or
1.144 for a/c = 0.25 and a/c = 0.128.

The finite plate width results in the following correction. The flange width is 300 mm
and the flange thickness is 15 mm. We assume an initial crack at the coverplate weld toe
with a depth a = 0.1 mm into the flange thickness and a width of 2c. In the beginning of
crack extension with the average a/c = 0.3, c results in c = 0.33 mm. On the other hand
the approximation for coverplates of c a = 5462
1 133
.
.
gives c = 0.40 mm. Such cracks
always develop in the middle of a flange above the web. So we have the configuration
of a crack in the middle of a plate of finite width. Since this is not a through crack, the
geometric influence is covered already by F
s
as above and F
w
= 1.

At the approximate end of crack propagation we have a through thickness crack of a =
15 mm and a respective c a = 5462
1 133
.
.
= 117.45 mm. Therefore the correction factor
for finite width is given as

F
w
= [sec((c)/(2b))]
1/2
= [sec(( 117.45)/(300))]
1/2
= 1.7295

The stress gradient correction factor F
g
depends on the actual crack length a. We
assume at the beginning of crack propagation a = 0.1 mm. Hereafter, we have the
following values for the constants a = a/t
f
= 0.1/15 = 0.00667 and G = 6.789 and b =
0.4348.

Finally the stress concentration factor

K
tm
=
( ) ( )
+ + 3539 1981 5798 . log . log . Z t t t
f cp f

and with t
cp
= 15 mm, t
f
= 15 mm and z = t
cp
= 15 mm we have K
tm
= 5.798.
In the geometrical assumptions for the above constants the width of coverplate and
flange was identical. In the case of our example we have b
f
= 300 mm > 250 mm = b
cp

as well as a further stress concentration because of the beam shape and the web-to
TALAT 2403 43
flange weldments. Strain gage measurements have indicated a stress concentration of
approximately 30 %, so a further global stress concentration factor of 1.3 is assumed.

Web Stiffener

In a similar way as above the free surface correction factor is calculated. For the
beginning of the crack propagation a = 0.1 mm and at the approximate end of crack
propagation, with a through thickness crack established a = 15 mm. From the
relationship of Figure 2403.05.02 c = 1.403a
0.951
for stiffeners we get for the half
crack-width c = 0.157 mm or c = 18.43 mm and accordingly a/c = 0.64 or a/c = 0.81; we
assume an average value of a/c = 0.8.
F a c
s
= = = 1211 0186 1211 0186 08 1045 . . . . . .
the accuracy could be lower though, since a/c > 0.4.

For the beginning of crack propagation we assume again F
w
= 1 since concentration
effects are covered by the free surface correction. At the end of crack propagation with a
through-flange-thickness crack of a = 15 mm and with a/c = 0.8 as assumed c =
18.75mm. So the correction factor for finite width plate with an edge crack (as the
worst case for the component) is ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
[ ]
F b c c b
w
= 2 2
1 2
/ tan / and with
2b = 300 mm, F
w
= 1.013.

The shape correction factor F
e
is calculated for the beginning of crack propagation with
a = 0.1 mm and a/c = 0.64, F
e
= 0.767. For the end of the elliptical crack shape, when
the crack is through the flange thickness with a = 15 mm and c = 18.75 mm we get F
e
=
0.706.

The stress gradient correction factor F
g
depends on the actual crack length a. We
assume at the beginning of crack propagation a = 0.1. Hereafter we have the following
values for the constants a = a/t
f
= 0.1/15 = 0.00667 and G = 2.776 and b = 0.2487.
Finally the stress concentration factor K
tm
=
( )
1621 3963 . log . + Z t
f
with t
f
= 15 mm
and z = t
f
= 15 mm we have K
tm
= 3.963. The stress gradient correction factor for the
beginning of crack propagation is calculated as F
g
= 1.545 and for the end of crack
propagation F
g
= 1.050.

Detail Crack Size F
s
F
g
F
w
F
e

Coverplate Beginning 1,118 3,278 1,000 0,933
End 1,144 0,744 1,730 0,976
Web Stiffener Beginning 1,045 1,545 1,000 0,767
End 1,045 1,050 1,013 0,706

Correction factors can be also estimated through the IIW Recommendation "The Fitness
for Purpose of Welded Structures", SST-1141/89. A solution is provided for surface
cracks at weld toes in the general form of K M a
K
= .

TALAT 2403 44
alu
Correction Factor Development with Progressing Crack
Coverplate F
tot
Web Stiffener M
K
F
tot
, M
K
a/B
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1
2403.06.02
Correction Factor Development with Progressing Crack

The full correlation between correction factors F
tot
for the coverplate or M
K
for the web
stiffener vs. the crack development expressed with the parameter a/B (where B = 15 mm
= flange thickness) is given in the diagram of Figure 2403.06.02. These values will be
used together with the appropriate regions of crack propagation diagrams for the
respective material zones, Figure 2403.06.03.

alu
Crack Propagation vs. and
eff
Crack Propagation vs. and
eff
2403.06.03

For the estimation of number of cycles to failure the upper portion of the da/dN diagram
above 10
-5
m/cycle is not taken into account. The upper boundary da/dN curve actually
used in the calculation is shown in Figure 2403.06.04, where also the limit curve given
by IIW recommendation SST-1141-89 is plotted. These lead to the final estimated S-N
TALAT 2403 45
curve for detail D2 = coverplate, Figure 2403.06.05, and detail B2 = web stiffener,
Figure 2403.06.06, plotted against respective experimental results.

alu
Calculation Curves for da/dN Lines
2403.06.04
Calculation Curves for da/dN Lines
AlZn4.5Mg1 (7020)
Base material
R = 0.0, Thickness = 8.0 mm
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
-9
10
-10
10
-11
1 2 4 6 10 20 40 60 100
Boundary curve
for calculation
d
a
/
d
N

[
m
/
c
y
c
l
e
]
K
eff
[MPa m]
K
C
= 60 MPa m
1/2
IIW
Limit curve
+ R= 0
x R = -1
o R = +0.5
m
I
m
II
m
III
m
IV
m
V
m
I
m
II
m
III
m
IV
m
V
K
eff
da/dN
=15
=2.5
=0.94
=8.0
=2.7
0.78
1
2.8
4.65
6.16
60
1x10
-11
4x10
-10
5.25x10
-9
8.46x10
-9
8.08x10
-8
3.37.10
-5
Boundary curve data for calculation:

alu
2403.06.05
S-N Curve for Cover Plate
x+ + +
+
+
+ +
+ +
x x
x x
++
+
x
29.5
21.3
19.9
P 50
P 50
P 50
500
400
300
200
100
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
8
7
6
5
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
10
8
2 4 6 2 4 6 2 4 6 2 4 6 2 4 6
S
t
r
e
s
s

r
a
n
g
e

i
n

M
P
a
Cycles to failure N
S-N Curve for Cover Plate
Detail D2 - TUM
AlZn4,5Mg1
R = -1
R = 0,1
R = +0,6
Calculation result
IIW boundary
curve
Test results

TALAT 2403 46
alu
2403.06.06
S-N Curve for Web Stiffener
54.9
P 50
500
400
300
200
100
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
8
7
6
5
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
10
8
2 4 6 2 4 6 2 4 6 2 4 6 2 4 6
S
t
r
e
s
s

r
a
n
g
e

i
n

M
P
a
Cycles to failure N
S-N Curve for Web Stiffener
Detail D2 - TUM
AlZn4,5Mg1
R = -1
R = 0,1
Calculation result
IIW boundary
curve
Test results

TALAT 2403 47
2403.07 Literature/References

Introductory chapters to fracture mechanics have been taken mainly out of the text book
by

Rolfe/Barsom: "Fracture and Fatigue Control in Structures"

further information has been utilised from

Hertzberg: "Deformation and fracture mechanics of engineering materials", John
Wiley & Sons, New York, 1976

Schwalbe: "Bruchmechanik metallischer Werkstoffe", Hanser Verlag, Mnchen,
1980

F. Ostermann (Hrsg.): "Betriebssicherheit von Aluminium Konstruktionen", Seminar
Meckenheim, 1990

Graf, U.: "Bruchmechanische Kennwerte und Verfahren fr die Berechnung der
Ermdungsfestigkeit geschweiter Aluminium Bauteile", Berichte aus
dem konstruktiven Ingenieurbau, 3/92, TU Mnchen, 1992

Kosteas: "Vorlesungsmanuskript zur angewanden Bruchmechanik", TU Mnchen,
1991

Rossmanith: "Grundlagen der Bruchmechanik", Springer Verlag, Wien/New York,
1982

TALAT 2403 48
2403.08 List of Figures

Figure Nr. Figure Title (Overhead)
2403.02.01 Notch-Toughness Performance Levels vs. Temperature
2403.02.02 Relation between Performance and Transition Temperature for Three
Different Steel Qualities
2403.02.03 Notch-Toughness of Welded Aluminium Alloy 5083 vs. Temperature

2403.03.01 Elastic Stress Field Distribution near a Crack
2403.03.02 K
I
Values for Various Crack Geometries
2403.03.03 Relation between Material Toughness, Flaw Size and Stress
2403.03.04 Analogy: Column Instability and Crack Instability
2403.03.05 Basic Modes of Cracking
2403.03.06 Distribution of Stress in the Crack Tip Region
2403.03.07 Stress Field Equations in the Vicinity of Crack Tips
2403.03.08 SIF for Through-Thickness Crack
2403.03.09 SIF for Double-Edge Crack
2403.03.10 SIF for Single-Edge Crack
2403.03.11 SIF for Cracks Emanating from Circular or Elliptical Holes
2403.03.12 SIF for Single-Edge Crack in Beam in Bending
2403.03.13 SIF: Elliptical or Circular Crack in an Infinite Plate
2403.03.14 SIF: Surface Crack
2403.03.15 Flaw Shape Parameter, Q
2403.03.16 Distribution of Stress in the Crack Tip Region
2403.03.17 Plastic Zone Dimensions

2403.04.01 Effect of Thickness on K
c

2403.04.02 SE Bend Specimen and CT Tension Specimen
2403.04.03 Specimen Orientation
2403.04.04 R-Curves and Critical Fracture Toughness Values K
R
for Different Initial
Cracks a
0

2403.04.05 Normalized Plot for Critical Flaw Size
2403.04.06 J-Integral
2403.04.07 Interpretation of the J-Integral
2403.04.08 Procedure of J Measurement
2403.04.09 Evaluation Procedure and Limits of J Measurement
2403.04.10 Hinge Model for a Standard Bending Specimen
TALAT 2403 49

Figure Nr. Figure Title (Overhead)
2403.05.01 Crack Shape Correction Factor F
e

2403.05.02 Crack Shape Measurements
2403.05.03 Representative Values for G, and K
tm

2403.05.04 Correction Factors vs. Crack Size for Coverplates

2403.06.01 Influence of Cover Plates and Web Stiffeners
2403.06.02 Correction Factor Development with Progressing Crack
2403.06.03 Crack Propagation vs. K and K
eff

2403.06.04 Calculation Curves for da/dN Lines
2403.06.05 S-N Curve for Cover Plate
2403.06.06 S-N Curve for Web Stiffener

Talat - Fracture

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Talat - Fracture

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

TALAT Lecture 2403

Applied Fracture Mechanics

Through thickness crack

Increasing flaw size, 2a

Mode I is characterized by displacement of the two fracture surfaces perpendicular to

Finite Width Plate

Infinite Width Plate

The energy line integral J is defined for an

curve) are obtained for different

R-Curve Regression Line

Anda mungkin juga menyukai