MATERIALS SCIENCE
C15: Fracture and Fatigue
Name
College.
Dr Cathie Rae
Department of Materials
Science and Metallurgy
Catherine
Rae
9
Lectures
Synopsis
Introduction:
This
course
examines
the
use
of
fracture
mechanics
in
the
prediction
of
mechanical
failure.
We
explore
the
range
of
macroscopic
failure
modes;
brittle
and
ductile
behaviour.
We
take
a
closer
look
at
fast
fracture
in
brittle
and
ductile
materials
characteristics
of
fracture
surfaces;
inter
granular
and
intragranular
failure,
cleavage
and
microductility.
We
describe
the
range
of
fatigue
failure
and
apply
fracture
mechanics
to
the
growth
of
fatigue
cracks.
Introduction:
Revision
of
concept
of
energy
release
rate,
G,
and
fracture
energy,
R.
Obreimoffs
experiment.
Brittle
and
ductile
failure,
Timeline
for
developments.
Linear
Elastic
Fracture
Mechanics,
(LEFM).
We
look
at
the
three
loading
modes
and
hence
the
state
of
stress
ahead
of
the
crack
tip.
This
leads
to
the
definition
of
the
stress
concentration
factor,
stress
intensity
factor
and
the
material
parameter
the
critical
stress
intensity
factor.
Superposition
principle,
Mixed
mode
loading
and
the
prediction
of
crack
growth
direction.
Plasticity
at
the
crack
tip
and
the
principles
behind
the
approximate
derivation
of
plastic
zone
shape
and
size.
Limits
on
the
applicability
of
LEFM.
The
effect
of
Constraint,
definition
of
plane
stress
and
plane
strain
and
the
effect
of
component
thickness.
Concept
of
G

R
curves,
measuring
G
and
K.
ElasticPlastic
Fracture
Mechanics;
(EPFM).
The
definition
of
alternative
failure
prediction
parameters,
Crack
Tip
Opening
Displacement,
and
the
J
integral.
Measurement
of
parameters
and
examples
of
use.
The
effect
of
Microstructure
on
fracture
mechanism
and
path,
cleavage
and
ductile
failure,
factors
improving
toughness,
Fatigue:
definition
of
terms
used
to
describe
fatigue
cycles,
High
Cycle
Fatigue,
Low
Cycle
Fatigue,
mean
stress
R
ratio,
strain
and
load
control.
SN
curves.
Total
life
and
damage
tolerant
approaches
to
life
prediction,
Paris
law.
Adapting
data
to
real
conditions:
Goodmans
rule
and
Miners
rule.
Micromechanisms
of
fatigue
damage,
fatigue
limits
and
initiation
and
propagation
control,
leading
to
a
consideration
of
factors
enhancing
fatigue
resistance.
Factors
affecting
crack
growth
rates:
Creep,
oxidation
and
corrosion.
Dissipation
energy
criterion
for
crack
growth.
rd
T.L.
Anderson,
Fracture
Mechanics
Fundamentals
and
Applications,
3
Ed.
CRC
press,
(2005)
(Fracture
mechanics
and
its
application
to
fatigue,
very
thorough
and
readable)
nd
B.
Lawn,
Fracture
of
Brittle
Solids,
Cambridge
Solid
State
Science
Series
2
ed
1993.
(Exactly
as
it
says
on
the
label
very
good
on
LEFM)
J.F.
Knott,
P
Withey,
Worked
examples
in
Fracture
Mechanics,
Institute
of
Materials.
(Excellent
short
summary
of
fracture
mechanics
and
good
worked
examples)
H.L.
Ewald
and
R.J.H.
Wanhill
Fracture
Mechanics,
Edward
Arnold,
(1984).
(Provides
very
clear
explanations
different
perspective
from
Anderson)
S.
Suresh,
Fatigue
of
Materials,
Cambridge
University
Press,
(1998)
(Excellent
on
fatigue
but
long
and
quite
tough
going)
G.
E.
Dieter,
Mechanical
Metallurgy,
McGraw
Hill,
(1988)
(Good
entrylevel
text
on
mechanical
properties)
Robert
Wei,
Fracture
Mechanics,
CUP,
(2010).
(Concise
account
of
the
basics
and
good
examples
of
creep
and
environmental
effects
on
fatigue
and
fracture.)
SYNOPSIS
This
course
examines
the
use
of
fracture
mechanics
in
the
prediction
of
mechanical
failure.
We
explore
macroscopic
failure
modes;
brittle
and
ductile
behaviour,
and
take
a
closer
look
at
fast
fracture
in
brittle
and
ductile
materials
characteristics
of
fracture
surfaces;
intergranular
and
intra
granular
failure,
cleavage
and
microductility.
Fatigue
causes
90%
of
engineering
failures:
we
examine
how
we
characterise
the
susceptibility
of
materials
to
fatigue
and
estimate
lifetimes.
2 sE
a
(2 s + p )E
a
Obreimoffs
experiment
wedgingIB
Ed3h2
U = UE =
8a3
Equating
the
elastic
energy
to
the
surface
energy
gives
an
equilibrium
crack
length
ao
of:
ao = 4 3Ed3h2 /16
Energy absorbed
Energy absorbed
% Cleavage failure
NDT
FATT
Temperature
Two
of
the
transition
temperatures
defined
are:
the
nil
ductility
temperature
where
the
curve
just
begins
to
rise,
and
the
fracturesurface
appearance
transition
temperature,
FATT,
based
on
50%
of
the
surface
being
cleavage
failure.
The
former
corresponds
to
the
point
at
which
general
yield
occurs
throughout
the
remaining
width
of
the
sample.
Factors
promoting
cleavage
failure
are:
TIME
LINE
Fatigue
Fracture
~1500
1842
1843
18521869
1886
1900
1913
1920
1930
Obreimoffs experiment
1938
1945
1945
1953 54
1954
1956
1956
1956
1956
1957
1960
1960
196061
1968
1976
1980
When
a
crack
occurs
in
a
material
the
local
stress
around
the
crack
is
raised.
LEFM
relies
on
the
sufficient
of
the
specimen/component
being
elastic
such
that
the
energy
release
rate
can
be
calculated
from
the
elastic
displacements
around
the
crack
tip.
Hence
if
you
can
solve
for
the
elastic
stress
in
any
configuration
you
can
(in
principle)
calculate
G
from
dUE/da.
rr
= o
2
+/ro2 $
ro4
ro2 '
&
)
+ &1 + 3 4 ) cos 20
,1 +
.
1
r2 %
r4
r2 (
o
2
+/r2 %
r4 (
,1 + o ''1 + 3 o ** cos 20
.
1
r2 &
r4 )
,*
o (*"
ro4
ro2 %
r = )$$1 3 4 + 2 2 '' sin2 
2 +*#
r
r &
.*
Substituting
r
=
ro
and
=
90
and
0:
gives
the
maximum
and
minimum
hoop
stresses
,
at
the
edge
of
the
notch
as
3o
and
o.
Thus
the
presence
of
a
round
hole
in
the
plate
increases
the
tensile
stress
by
a
factor
of
three
in
one
direction
and
introduces
a
compressive
stress
at
the
top
of
the
hole
equal
to
the
distant
tensile
stress.
Because
all
the
stresses
are
elastic
and
therefore
small,
the
imposed
stress
fields,
and
the
solutions
for
those
stress
fields,
can
be
added:
this
is
known
as
the
PRINCIPLE
OF
SUPERPOSITION.
Hence,
in
biaxial
stress
the
two
stresses
o
at
right
angles
are
added
to
each
other
to
produce
a
2D
hydrostatic
tension
and
the
stresses
around
the
hole
in
the
plate
are
constant:
3o o = 2o.
Another
important
situation
for
which
an
exact
solution
exists
is
that
of
an
elliptical
hole,
semiaxes
a
and
b,
in
a
plate,
subject
to
a
distant
stress
o.
In
this
case
the
maximum
stress
is
at
the
tip
of
the
ellipse:
2b
2
2a
$
# 2a &
a'
max = o %1+ (
or
max = o &&1+ 2 ))
b'
(
$
%
b2
where
=
the
radius
tangential
at
the
tip.
a
$ a'
)
= o &&2
)
%
(
This
is
slightly
modified
for
a
half
crack
at
the
edge
of
a
plate
by
the
factor
1.12
because
the
free
surface
(zero
stress)
allows
the
ellipse
to
open
rather
wider
than
for
the
embedded
crack.
The
factor
max/o
by
which
the
elastic
stress
is
raised
by
a
feature
such
as
a
crack
or
a
hole
is
the
stress
concentration
factor
kt.
This
is
dimensionless.
SHARP
CRACKS
The
above
is
very
useful
for
finding
the
effect
of
features
(intended
or
unintended)
in
the
structure,
but
most
cracks
are
long
and
have
sharp
tips.
These
can
be
of
atomic
dimensions
in
brittle
materials.
In
1938
Westergaard
solved
the
stress
field
for
an
infinitely
sharp
crack
in
an
infinite
plate.
The
elastic
stresses
were
given
by
the
equations;
xx =
! $ (
! $ ! 3 $+
cos " % *1 sin " % sin " %# 2 &)
# 2 & # 2 &,
2 r
o a
yy =
! $ '
! $ ! 3 $*
cos " % )1+ sin " % sin " %,
# 2 &(
# 2 & # 2 &+
2 r
o a
xy =
o a
! $
! $
! 3 $
sin " % cos " % cos " %
# 2&
# 2&
#2&
2 r
+
similar
expressions
for
displacements
u
All
the
equations
separate
into
a
geometrical
factor
and
the
stress
intensity
factor:
K = o a
K
determines
the
amplitude
of
the
additional
stress
due
to
the
crack
over
the
whole
specimen,
but
particularly
at
the
crack
tip
where
growth
has
to
occur.
When
=
0
the
stress
opening
the
crack
has
the
value
:
yy =
o a
2 r
K
2 r
The
value
of
K
at
which
fracture
occurs
is
the
materialdependant
Fracture
Toughness:
K Ic
= f a
For
a
fixed
stress
this
defines
the
maximum
stable
crack
length
or
for
a
fixed
crack
length
the
maximum
stress.
10
You
have
come
across
K
in
1A
and
1B:
Be
careful,
there
are
a
number
of
parameters
K:
kt =
max
o
K = Y o a
K = 1.12 o a
2
a
Circular
internal
crack,
radius
a
in
an
infinite
body
lying
normal
to
app
o
2
K = 1.12 o a
Semicircular
surface
crack,
radius
a
in
a
semiinfinite
body,
normal
to
app:
K=
= K II
11
G=
K2
K2
(1 2 )
for
plane
strain.
For
plain
stress,
or
G =
E
E
To
show
how
this
works
we
take
the
example
of
a
simple
throughthickness
centre
crack.
We
calculate
G
from
the
work
necessary
to
close
the
open
crack.
The
displacement,
u,
of
the
surface
of
the
crack
is
given
by
the
equation:
u=
2 o 2
a x2
E
1/2
Hence
the
elastic
energy
is
the
negative
of
the
work
done:
a" u %
UE = 2 $ o ' 2dx
0
# 2 &
1/2
4 o2 2 a 2
2
a
x
dx
2E 0
1/2
4 o2 2 /2
dx
UE =
a 1 sin2
d
0
2E
d
4 2 /2
UE = o a cos acos d
E 0
4 o2a2 1 /2
UE =
(cos2 + sin2 )d
0
E 2
UE =
UE =
4 o2a2 " $ /2
4 o2a2
o2a2
2E # %0
2 2E
E
Differentiating
the
elastic
energy
gives
the
energy
release
rate:
dUE
dUE 2a o2 K 2
G=
=
=
=
dA
2da
2E
E
Hence,
the
values
of
K
for
each
opening
mode,
KI,
KII,
KIII,
can
each
be
assessed
separately
by
adding
all
the
contributing
K
values
for
each
mode.
Thus
it
is
possible
to
assess
complex
shapes
and
loading
by
calculating
the
Ks
for
each
of
the
applied
loads.
12
But,
the
total
change
in
energy
in
the
body
as
a
whole
can
be
expressed
directly
in
terms
of
the
individual
stress
intensities
which
characterise
the
crack
tip
stress
and
displacement
fields.
The
total
energy
release
rate
is
given
by
the
expression:
Note: These equations do not include the background stress which must be added.
K dominated
ys
Overall stress
o
r
Plastic zone
Diagram
showing
the
net
stress
resulting
from
the
remote
stress
and
the
stress
intensity
.
For
o
<<
ys
the
plastic
zone
is
dominated
by
the
stress
concentration
effect
of
the
crack.
13
Take
a
simple
through
thickness
sharp
crack
of
length
a.
Add
to
this
a
tiny
virtual
crack
at
an
arbitrary
angle
to
the
plane
of
the
main
crack.
This
virtual
crack
is
too
small
to
affect
the
stress
state
at
the
tip,
but
Westergaards
equations
can
be
used
to
work
out
the
local
state
of
stress.
2
K I! = a K II! = r
( K !) + ( K ! )
a
and
G =
I
II
Using
the
polar
versions
of
Westergaards
equations
to
give
the
local
stress
state
at
the
crack
14
( )
( a
( a
" %+
" %
" %+
o
o
K I! = * o
cos3 $ ' a
and
K II! = * o
sin $ ' cos2 $ ' a
* 2 r
*) 2 r
# 2 &,
# 2&
# 2 &,
)
2
2
'
! $$ ! ! $
! $$ * a
o2 ao )!
3
2
Hence:
G =
# cos # &&& + ## sin # & cos # &&& ,
2 r )#"
2 %% " " 2 %
2 %% , E
"
"
(
+
To
predict
the
angle
we
only
need
consider
the
dependent
terms
in
the
centre:
Plotting
these
gives
the
following
graph:
1.2%
1%
0.8%
0.6%
0.4%
0.2%
0%
!180%
!90%
0%
90%
180%
!0.2%
KI%
KII%
G%
15
ys =
KI
2ry
2
1 $ KI '
&
)
ry =
2 &% ys )(
hence
This,
however,
takes
no
account
of
the
redistribution
of
stress
from
the
material
that
had
yielded
to
remaining
material
further
away
from
the
crack
tip.
the
We
can
estimate
this
by
assuming
a
plastic
zone,
radius
ry
ahead
of
the
crack
tip.
The
effect
of
the
plastic
flow
is
to
open
the
crack
more
widely
than
the
purely
elastic
response
would
predict,
thus
the
elastic
field
of
the
crack
behaves
as
if
it
were
a
longer
than
it
really
is.
The
tip
of
the
virtual
crack
acts
as
the
nominal
centre
for
the
stress
and
strain
fields
resulting
from
the
crack
and
for
the
associated
plastic
zone.
A
Diagram
showing
elastic
stress
redistribution
as
a
result
of
yielding
Irwin
model.
The
extent
of
the
extended
plastic
zone
is
defined
by
the
yield
stress.
2
1 $ KI '
2
&
) =
ry =
a + a
2
2 &% ys )(
2 ys
16
Irwin
determined
Da
on
the
basis
that
the
average
of
the
nominal
stress
in
the
plastic
zone
in
the
plane
perpendicular
to
the
stress
axis
should
equal
the
real
stress,
i.e.
the
yield
stress.
Then
the
load
is
being
supported
by
the
cracked
component
remains
the
same
with
and
without
the
plastic
zone.
In
effect
the
area
under
the
stress
graph,
A,
is
set
equal
to
ysa.
ry
ys a =
(a + a)
2r
ry
dr y ry
ys a + ry =
(a + a)
2r
dr
ys a + ry =
2 a + a
2
ry but ys 2ry =
(a + a) from above
ys
(a + r ) =
2ys 2ry
2
1 % KI (
'
*
r
y
a = ry
and
a =
2 '& ys *)
and rp
1 $ KI '
&
) = 2ry
&% ys )(
Thus
the
virtual
crack
tip
determining
the
elastic
stress/strain
field
ends
at
the
centre
of
the
plastic
zone.
Dugdales
analysis
is
rather
more
sophisticated
but
also
assumes
that
the
crack
is
longer
than
it
really
is
and
superimposes
point
closure
forces
onto
each
end
of
the
crack
onto
the
overall
elastic
solution
for
the
enlarged
crack.
The
criterion
for
the
imposed
closure
stress
is
that
the
sum
of
the
closure
and
remote
stresses
cancel
at
the
crack
tip
removing
the
singularity.
(see
Anderson
page
64)
!K $
!K $
rp = 0.392 ## I && instead
of
rp = 0.318 ## I && from
Irwin.
" ys %
" ys %
It
is
not
worth
worrying
too
much
about
these
factors
as
both
analysis
are
predicated
on
perfect
plastic
behavior,
i.e
no
work
hardening.
In
fact
materials
will
work
harden
to
different
extents
and
would
thus
be
able
to
sustain
higher
loads
in
the
plastic
zone
than
these
analyses
predict.
FE
analysis
provides
a
better
method
of
assessing
the
plastic
zone
size
for
each
material
from
its
particular
plasticity
characteristics.
17
!K $
than
2.5 # I & .
# &
" ys %
This
means
that,
in
effect,
rp
<
a/8
for
LEFM
to
apply.
As
a
rule
of
thumb,
the
plastic
zone
should
be
less
than
20%
of
the
area
dominated
by
the
crack
tip
stresses
(rather
than
the
remote
stresses)
which
is
about
10%
of
the
crack
length.
18
ys
1 "
=
$ 1 2
2#
) + (
) + (
% 2
'&
and
substituting
the
Mode
I
principal
stresses
in
polar
coordinates:
1 =
! $'
! $*
cos # &)1+ sin # &,
" 2 %(
" 2 %+
2 r
2 =
! $(
! $+
cos # &*1 sin # &
" 2 %)
" 2 %,
2 r
KI
KI
3 =
2 K I
! $
cos # & for
plane
strain
" 2%
2 r
we
are
able
to
solve
for
rp
and
obtain
the
limits
of
the
plastic
zone:
2
1 !# K I $&
rp =
4 #" ys &%
()
'
3 2 *
)1+ cos + sin ,
2
(
+
1 !# K I $& (
rp =
* 1 2
4 #" ys &% )
()
plotting
this
gives
the
shapes
for
the
plastic
zone.
Note
the
value
for
plane
strain
will
be
smaller
by
2
some
(12)
which
is
0.16
for
=
0.3.
Thus
the
plastic
zone
is
of
a
slightly
different
shape
and
smaller
in
size
for
the
constrained
central
part
of
the
crack.
Plane
stress
at
outside
edge
Plane
strain
in
centre
Diagram
of
the
plastic
zone
and
the
effect
of
through
thickness
crack.
Plastic
Zone
shape
for
Mode
I,
II
and
III
crack
opening,
calculated
from
von
Mises
yield
criterion.
19
Similarly
the
plastic
zone
size
and
shape
can
be
derived
for
the
other
crack
opening
modes
and
these
are
shown
in
the
above
Figure.
In
general
the
most
likely
cause
of
crack
growth
is
mode
I
opening,
and
consideration
of
this
is
able
to
solve
most
problems.
Again
it
must
be
emphasized
that
the
exact
solution
depends
on
the
plasticity
of
the
material
and
that
there
is
a
gradual
transition
from
plane
stress
to
plane
strain.
A
high
workhardening
rate
reduces
the
plastic
zone
size
as
more
stress
can
be
sustained
by
the
plastic
material.
When
the
plastic
zone
size
becomes
comparable
with
the
thickness
of
the
specimen,
plain
strain
is
not
achieved
at
the
centre
of
the
crack.
However,
provided
the
plastic
zone
size
is
small
compared
to
the
thickness
the
stress
intensity
factor
KIc
provides
a
reasonable
fracture
criterion.
As
the
thickness
decreases
the
measured
KIc
increases
from
a
plane
strain
plateau
value
to
a
higher
value
characteristic
of
plane
stress.
Thus
to
define
KIc
a
small
plastic
zone
size
and
plane
strain
conditions
are
required.
But
use
can
be
made
of
LEFM
in
situations
of
plane
stress
i.e.
thin
plates,
provided
the
values
of
KIc
that
are
used
are
found
in
material
of
similar
thickness,
In
these
circumstances
KIc
is
not
a
material
constant
as
it
varies
with
the
dimensions
of
the
specimen.
20
KIc
Plane stress
Plane strain
Specimen Thickness
The
effect
of
specimen
thickness
on
the
critical
stress
intensity
and
tear
drop
morphology
in
a
corner
crack
specimen.
The
constraint
at
the
centre
of
a
thick
sample
causes
the
crack
to
progress
the
furthest
at
the
centre
of
the
crack
and
the
sides
fail
by
plastic
shear
forming
two
lips
which
will
point
up
or
down
randomly
as
in
the
cup
and
cone
fracture.
The
centre
part
of
the
crack
will
be
normal
to
the
tensile
axis
on
average,
(this
masks
valleys
and
ridges
on
a
smaller
scale).
As
the
load
on
the
sample
increases
the
plastic
zone
size
increases
and
the
width
in
plane
strain
decreases.
Eventually
the
plane
stress
conditions
extend
across
the
sample
and
a
diagonal
shear
failure
results.
This
leads
to
the
kind
of
fracture
surface
seen
below
where
the
crack
starts
at
a
notch
propagating
by
ductile
cleavage
at
right
angles
to
the
stress
.
Two
shear
lips
develop:
in
this
case
one
sloping
up
and
the
other
down.
21
R
AND
G
CURVES:
The
material
resistance
to
crack
extension,
R,
consists
of
the
energy
to
create
two
new
surfaces,
2gs
together
with
any
mechanism
that
absorbs
energy
as
the
crack
grows.
In
the
case
of
brittle
fracture
R
does
not
depend
on
the
size
of
the
crack,
but
where
plastic
work
is
done
developing
a
plastic
zone
R
may
well
vary
with
the
crack
size,
increasing
or
decreasing.
The
increase
could
result
from
an
increase
in
the
plastic
zone
size
as
we
saw
on
the
previous
page.
Initially
the
constraint
due
to
the
thickness
of
the
specimen
inhibits
plastic
flow,
restricts
the
size
of
the
plastic
zone
and
keeps
R
low.
As
a
plastic
zone
develops
at
the
sides
of
the
sample
R
increases
reducing
the
area
of
ductile
cleavage
until
the
entire
crack
fails
by
shear.
At
this
point
R
reaches
a
maximum
value.
(You
have
discussed
rising
R
values
in
IA
in
relation
to
crack
bridging)
[Alternatively,
a
decrease
could
result
from
the
strain
rate
sensitivity
of
the
flow
stress
reducing
the
plastic
zone
size
as
the
crack
grows
faster.]
G
varies
with
the
size
of
the
crack
and
the
geometry
of
loading.
For
fixed
grips
the
load
drops
as
the
crack
extends
and
thus
the
energy
release
rate,
G,
will
drop.
But
for
the
same
specimen
at
fixed
load,
G
increases
as
the
crack
grows.
22
MEASURING
G:
Consider
two
simple
situations,
a
fixed
strain
where
a
growing
crack
reduces
the
load
(strain
control)
and
a
fixed
load
where
the
crack
growth
increases
the
length
of
the
specimen
(load
control).
G=
1 " dU %
1 " dU %
$
' for
strain
control
and
G = $
' for
load
control.
B # da &u
B # da &P
*Note
U
=
potential
energy
and
u
=
displacement
and
P
=
load.
Consider
a
plate,
thickness
B,
loaded
with
a
force
P.
This
contains
a
crack
length
a
and
as
a
result
of
the
crack
the
plate
has
extended
a
distance
u.
The
crack
extends
by
da.
Under
load
control
the
specimen
lengthens
by
du,
and
the
work
done
by
the
external
force
is
dUF
=

Pu.
The
extra
work
stored
elastically
by
virtue
of
the
change
in
crack
length
and
the
consequent
change
in
specimen
length
dUE
=
1/2Pu.
Thus
half
the
work
done
is
stored
in
the
regular
way
as
in
an
uncracked
body
and
the
rest
is
released
as
the
elastic
response
of
the
body
changes
as
a
result
of
the
crack
growth.
Under
strain
control
the
load
is
reduced
by
dP
and
the
energy
released:
dUF
=
1/2uP
as
no
external
work
is
done
(dP
is
negative).
LC:
dUE
LC:
1
1
= Pdu Pdu = Pdu
2
2
1
GBa = + Pu
2
SC:
SC:
1
dUE = udP
2
1
GBa = uP
2
We
now
introduce
the
Compliance:
the
inverse
stiffness
C
=
u/P.
LC:
G=+
P ! du $
P ! du $ ! dC $
P 2 ! dC $
# & =+
#
& #
& =
#
&
2B " da %P
2B " dC %P " da %p 2B " da %p
G=
u " dP %
u " dP % " dC %
P 2 " dC %
$
' =
$
' $
' =
$
'
2B # da &u
2B # dC &u # da &u 2B # da &u
SC:
The
expression
for
G
is
the
same
in
both
cases.
The
compliance
depends
on
the
specimen
shape,
in
particular
on
the
crack
geometry
and
length,
remember
the
sample
is
assumed
to
be
elastic
at
all
points.
By
measuring
the
compliance
as
a
function
of
the
crack
length
the
energy
release
rate
can
be
calculated
from
the
load
P.
23
Lets
look
at
this
graphically:
for
a
specimen
under
strain
control
(the
grips
are
fixed)
the
crack
growth
causes
a
fall
in
the
external
force
P
which
is
equal
to
the
energy
released
by
the
crack
in
growing
a.
This
is
equal
to
the
area
of
the
shaded
triangle
OAC.
Fixed Load
A
B
a
dUE = 1/2Pdu
a
a+da
O
P
Pdu
du
For
Load
control,
the
specimen
extends
at
fixed
load
and
the
energy
released
is
the
area
of
the
triangle
OAB.
Thus
the
only
difference
between
the
two
cases
is
the
area
of
the
triangle
ABC
w hich
is
of
the
order
1/2Pu
and
approaches
zero
in
the
limit.
Thus
the
value
of
G
depends
only
on
the
geometry
of
the
sample:
shape,
crack
length
etc,
and
the
loading,
P.
24
MEASURING
R:
For
brittle
materials
R
does
not
change
as
the
crack
grows
and
failure
occurs
when
the
stress
rises
to
the
point
where
G
equals
R.
The
R
curve
can
be
measured
from
a
plot
of
load
P
against
extension
u,
using
the
gradient
of
the
unloading
line
at
any
point
to
give
the
compliance
as
the
crack
extends.
G =
P 2 ! dC $
#
&
2B " da %u
For
a
rising
R
curve
G
must
exceed
R
at
any
crack
length,
but
as
the
crack
grows
R
can
exceed
G.
Hence,
for
fast
fracture,
G
must
increase
with
the
crack
length
faster
than
the
resistance
to
crack
growth.
Fast
fracture
will
occur
when
dG/da
>
dR/da.
If
dG/da
=
dR/da
the
crack
will
continue
growing
in
a
controlled
manner
(socalled
stable
crack
growth).
25
MEASURING KIc
In
principle
k
can
be
measured
from
the
load
at
failure
and
the
crack
length
in
a
standard
sized
specimen
containing
a
sharp
crack
grown
usually
by
fatigue.
However,
for
the
test
to
be
valid
three
criteria
must
be
satisfied:
the
specimen
must
be
large
enough
for
the
plastic
zone
size
to
be
a
small
proportion
of
the
sample
and
we
have
the
criterion
for
the
dimensions
a,
B
and
W
discussed
earlier:
2
!K $
a,
B
and
(Wa)
2.5 # I &
# &
" ys %
the crack is still roughly in the middle of the sample, 0.45 a/W 0.55.
If
the
testpiece
were
entirely
elastic
and
the
load
displacement
curve
would
be
linear,
it
is
generally
not
as
the
tip
of
the
crack
begins
to
yield.
The
value
of
the
load,
PQ,
to
be
used
to
assess
KIC
is
taken
as
the
point
at
which
the
curve
crosses
a
line
drawn
with
a
gradient
95%
of
the
initial
tangent.
Sometimes
there
is
a
small
amount
of
unstable
crack
growth
prior
to
failure
at
a
higher
load,
popin
behaviour.
In
this
case
or
if
the
sample
fails
before
a
5%
deviation
from
linearity,
the
popin
stress
or
the
ultimate
stress
prior
to
failure
are
used.
The
provisional
value
of
KIc,
KQ
can
then
be
calculated
from
the
equation:
KQ =
PQ
B W
f a / W
where
f(a/W)
is
a
dimensionless
function
of
the
specimen
dimensions
specific
to
the
testpiece
design.
These
are
all
set
out
in
the
ASTM
standard
E399.
26
As
an
example,
for
the
most
common
compact
specimen
testpiece
the
equation
is:
f a /W =
2+a /W
"
0.866 + 4.64 a / W 13.32 a / W
3/2 $
#
1 a / W
+14.72 a / W
4%
5.6 a / W '
&
27
The
requirements
for
the
minimum
specimen
testpiece
size
for
LEFM
to
be
valid
are
very
stringent
for
ductile
materials.
In
fact
the
size
of
testpiece
needed
to
produce
a
valid
and
representative
value
of
KIc
are
such
that
large
amounts
of
material
and
huge
machines
are
required
for
testing.
More
importantly,
the
scale
could
well
exceed
the
size
of
the
component
the
results
are
to
be
applied
to.
Under
these
circumstances
we
still
need
a
measure
of
the
fracture
toughness
of
these
materials
in
order
to
predict
and
avoid
possible
failure.
Two
methods
have
been
developed
which
enable
small
scale
testing
to
be
applied
to
the
failure
of
ductile
materials.
These
are
the
Crack
Opening
Displacement
and
the
J
Integral
method.
28
The
CTOD
is
given
by
double
the
displacement
uyy
in
the
tensile
direction,
for
plane
stress
this
is
given
by
the
equation:
u=
2 o 2
a x2
E
1/ 2
1/ 2
2'
2 o $ 2
2
& a a r ) = o a2 a2 + 2ar r 2
u=
(
E %
E
ry =
let r = ry:
1 KI
2 ys
= 2u(ry ) =
=
( )
hence
ry =
! 1 K $
4 o
4K I
I &
2a ##
=
&
E
" 2 ys % E a
1/ 2
2 o
2ar
E
1/ 2
( )
KI
2 ys
2a K I
2 ys
4 KI2
4G
=
E ys ys
G
m ys
Remember
that
this
is
all
derived
from
the
elastic
solution
surrounding
a
small
plastic
zone
(page
10)
but
it
has
since
been
demonstrated
from
plasticity
theory
that
this
is
generally
true
even
if
the
plastic
zone
is
extensive.
The
critical
value
of
the
CTOD
thus
gives
a
reliable
measure
of
the
fracture
toughness
of
the
material.
Clearly
this
will
be
a
function
of
the
specimen
thickness
but
provided
the
thickness
of
the
testpiece
is
similar
to
the
component
the
test
result
can
be
used.
29
MEASURING
CTOD
This
is
very
difficult
to
measure
directly
and
is
usually
inferred
from
the
width
of
the
crack
opening
V
of
a
three
point
bending
specimen.
It
is
assumed
that
the
specimen
behaves
as
a
rigid
hinge
pivoting
about
some
point
in
the
uncracked
ligament
of
the
specimen
the
displacement
is
then
proportional
to
V:
V
=
(W a) (W a) + a
where
is
a
dimensionless
constant
between
0
and
1.
a
r(Wa)
(Wa)
P
CTOD
measured
from
a
three
point
bend
specimen.
Painstaking
experiments
measuring
the
value
of
V
and
then
by
sectioning
the
crack
established
this
relationship.
But
beware

it
depends
on
the
specimen
thickness
and
the
width
of
the
slot
and
the
length
of
the
crack.
There
are
four
values
of
recognised
by
the
ASTM
standards:
i
the
CTOD
at
the
onset
of
stable
ductile
crack
growth.
c
the
CTOD
at
the
onset
of
unstable
cleavage
failure,
u
the
CTOD
at
the
onset
of
unstable
crack
growth
following
extensive
ductile
stable
crack
growth
m
the
CTOD
at
maximum
load
where
the
specimen
does
not
break.
The
first
is
hard
to
detect;
the
only
clue
in
the
load
curve
being
a
slight
change
in
gradient.
The
next
two
are
identified
by
the
failure
of
the
sample
and
the
last
by
a
maximum
in
the
load
curve
without
the
failure
of
the
sample.
Vi
Vi
stable crack
growth +
plastic
collapse
stable crack
growth +
cleavage
cleavage
LOAD
P
Vm
Vu
Vc
30
J
INTEGRALS
The
J
integral
is
the
equivalent
of
the
G
for
the
elasticplastic
case.
It
is
the
rate
of
energy
absorbed
per
unit
area
as
the
crack
grows;
it
is
not
however
the
energy
release
rate
because
the
plastic
energy
is
not
recoverable
as
it
would
be
in
the
elastic
case.
The
definition
is:
J =
dU
dA
where
U
is
the
potential
energy
of
the
system
and
A
the
area
of
the
crack.
P
d
P
Load
dP
a
dU
a + da
Displacement
Energy
release
rate
for
nonlinear
deformation.
An
analogy
with
the
Linear
elastic
case
can
be
made;
compare
the
Figure
above
with
those
on
page
25.
The
stress
strain
curve
is
no
longer
linear,
but
the
area
under
the
curve
represents
the
work
done
in
extending
the
cracked
body
(without
extending
the
crack).
31
Plotting
two
curves
for
specimens
differing
only
in
the
length
of
the
crack,
a
and
a+a,
the
energy
required
to
grow
the
crack
is
the
difference
in
the
areas
under
the
two
graphs
shaded
in
the
Figures
on
page
25.
Since
the
area
decreases
as
the
crack
grows
dU/da
is
negative
and
J
=dU/da
at
unit
thickness.
Although
this
is
the
same
as
the
definition
of
the
energy
release
rate
we
used
earlier,
the
J
integral
for
the
plastic
case
does
not
represent
the
energy
released
as
the
crack
grows
because
much
of
the
energy
used
performs
plastic
deformation.
This
is
fine
so
long
as
you
are
just
loading
the
specimen
but
becomes
tricky
if
you
try
and
reverse
the
stress.
The
term
J
integral
comes
from
the
property
of
J
which
can
be
expressed
and
evaluated
as
a
closed
line
integral
around
the
crack
tip.
J
is
the
strain
energy
density
within
the
line
minus
the
surface
integral
of
the
normal
traction
stress
forces
normal
to
the
surface
defined
and
is
independent
of
the
path
the
integral
takes.
Diagram showing the line integral around the crack tip J integral.
It
can
be
evaluated
experimentally
by
measuring
the
stress
strain
curves
for
a
number
of
identical
specimens
containing
cracks
of
different
lengths
and
plotting
the
area
under
the
graph
U
for
each
specimen
as
a
function
of
the
crack
length
and
thus
evaluating
dU/dA
and
hence
J.
There
are
also
specific
specimen
geometries
(deeply
double
notched
and
notched
three
point
bending
specimens)
that
allow
J
to
be
measured
from
a
single
specimen.
These
experiments
allow
J
to
be
plotted
as
a
function
of
the
crack
extension.
Thus
although
J
is
defined
in
similar
terms
to
the
energy
release
rate
G,
and
indeed
reduces
to
G
for
linear
elastic
behavior,
J
for
elasticplastic
materials
is
closer
to
R,
the
resistance
to
crack
growth,
in
both
interpretation
and
form.
The
curve
plotted
against
the
crack
growth
from
the
original
crack
length
a,
shows
three
distinct
regions;
an
initial
zone
where
the
original
crack
blunts
but
does
not
grow
and
the
curve
rises
steeply,
a
secondary
region
initiating
at
JIc,
where
a
new
crack
nucleates
and
grows
developing
the
elasticplastic
zone
at
the
crack
tip,
until
finally
steady
state
crack
tip
conditions
are
achieved
and
the
crack
propagates
at
a
constant
value
of
the
J
resistance
JR.
Crack
blunting
32
JR
Fracture
Initiation
C
a
Steady
state
crack
growth
Diagram
indicating
the
J
curve
during
crack
growth.
The
validity
of
this
approach
has
limits,
just
as
the
LEFM
has.
These
are
reached,
in
general
terms,
when
the
extent
of
plastic
yielding
becomes
a
large
proportion
of
the
remaining
ligament
length.
At
this
point
a
single
parameter
for
crack
growth
is
not
sufficient
and
even
more
complicated
analysis
is
necessary.
33
FRACTURE
MORPHOLOGY
DUCTILE
FAILURE:
Ductile
failure
in
uniaxial
specimen
is
characterised
macroscopically
by
cup
and
cone
failure,
and
on
a
microscopic
scale
by
the
formation
and
coalescence
of
voids
generally
nucleated
at
second
phase
particles.
This
occurs
after
the
point
of
plastic
instability
has
been
reached
when
the
rate
of
work
hardening
can
no
longer
compensate
for
the
increase
in
the
stress
as
the
section
decreases.
Voids
nucleate
and
grow
most
rapidly
in
the
centre
of
the
sample
where
the
state
of
triaxial
stress
exists.
These
grow
and
coalesce
to
produce
a
circular
internal
crack
which
grows,
and
finally
fails
by
shear
in
the
plane
stress
outer
regions
of
the
sample.
Where
void
formation
is
difficult,
(for
example
in
pure
metals)
much
more
ductility
is
observed
and
the
sample
can
thin
almost
to
a
point
before
failure
occurs.
Diagram
showing
cup
and
cone
failure
in
tensile
specimen
Voids
almost
always
nucleate
at
secondphase
particles
either
by
decohesion
at
the
interface
or
by
fracture
of
the
second
phase
or
inclusion.
A
number
of
models
have
been
developed
which
look
at
the
effect
of
dislocation
pileups
at
secondphase
precipitates
formed
during
plastic
flow
as
the
trigger
to
void
nucleation
but
fail
to
predict
the
observation
that
voids
appear
to
nucleate
most
readily
at
larger
particles.
This
is
not
entirely
surprising
because
the
largest
precipitates
are
likely
to
be
those
with
the
highest
interface
energy
and
thus
the
largest
incentive
to
reduce
surface
to
volume
ratio,
and,
in
addition,
are
also
those
most
likely
to
crack
under
extensive
plastic
flow
in
the
surrounding
matrix.
This
latter
process
is
the
most
likely
to
occur
where
large
precipitates
are
present
and
can
be
readily
observed.
The
45
sides
of
the
cone
fail
last
as
the
central
crack
propagates
outwards.
In
the
absence
of
general
yielding
across
the
full
remaining
section
of
the
sample
the
progress
of
a
crack
by
ductile
means
relies
upon
the
nucleation
and
growth
of
voids
ahead
of
the
crack
tip.
The
stress
ahead
of
the
crack
tip
is
raised
to
about
4
times
the
stress
at
approximately
two
times
the
crack
tip
opening
displacement
or
CTOD
from
the
tip.
Voids
form
in
this
area
of
raised
stress
ahead
of
the
crack
tip.
34
Once
formed,
the
voids
grow,
becoming
elliptical
and
undergoing
extensive
plastic
flow
at
the
sides.
The
ligaments
between
the
voids
fail
by
shear
on
the
plane
of
highest
shear
stress
at
45
to
the
tensile
axis.
35
Polycrystalline
NiBased
superalloy
RR1000,
Fatigue
failure
at
Room
temperature
showing
transgranular
cleavage
Ductile
failure
at
high
temperature
in
IN
738
showing
gross
tearing.
AlMg
Si
alloy
failed
by
microvoid
coalescence
36
However,
for
metals,
in
particular
for
iron
,
it
has
been
shown
that
the
fracture
stress
follows
the
value
of
yield
stress
measured
in
compression
(even
though
in
tension
the
material
demonstrates
brittle
failure).
For
small
grains
sizes
yielding
precedes
failure,
at
larger
grains
sizes
the
two
occur
together.
At
the
tip,
the
crack
becomes
blunted
through
plasticity
and
thus
the
potentially
very
high
stresses
are
reduced
(see
next
section).
As
a
result
the
stresses
achieved
ahead
of
the
crack
tip
do
not
in
effect
exceed
34
times
the
yield
stress.
This
is
way
below
the
theoretical
strength
of
most
materials:
Hence
the
crack
cannot
simply
propagate
as
it
would
in
a
brittle
ceramic.
(e.g.
the
wedging
discussed
on
page
5.
There
must
be
a
crack
or
defect
ahead
of
the
crack
to
further
raise
the
stress
and
propagate
the
crack
if
cleavage
is
to
occur.
Under
conditions
of
plane
strain
i.e.
constraint,
the
critical
length
for
a
crack
from
the
Griffiths
criterion
is:
acrit =
2E s
1 2 f2
= 0.3m
2
2
2
where,
for
example
in
iron,
f
=
1GNm
and
E
=
200GNm ,
and
s
=
2Jm .
Hence
some
plasticity
at
the
crack
tip
is
necessary
to
form
cracks
of
roughly
this
size
in
order
to
propagate
the
crack
further.
A
number
of
mechanisms
by
which
microcracks
can
form
have
been
proposed
and
are
illustrated
on
the
next
page.
The
microcrack
is
limited
to
a
single
grain
due
to
the
difficulty
in
propagating
across
the
boundary.
Hence
the
stress
intensity
ahead
of
a
microcrack
is
limited
by
the
(grain
size),
this
limits
the
stress
to
nucleate
further
cracks
and
propagate
the
failure.
This
results
in
a
HallPetch
type
relationship
between
the
failure
stress
and
the
grain
size:
1
'
*2
E gb ,
)
f
) #1 2 % d ,
& +
($
where
gb
is
the
plastic
work
to
propagate
across
the
grain
boundary
and
generally
exceeds
the
usual
p
term.
There
are
other
mechanisms
by
which
grain
refinement
to
affect
the
fracture
stress;
in
mild
steels
the
cleavage
fracture
is
controlled
by
the
fracture
of
grain
boundary
carbides,
and
an
increase
in
the
overall
grain
boundary
area
with
smaller
grain
size
leads
to
smaller
carbides
and
thus
a
higher
fracture
stress.
Grain
size
is
hence
the
one
of
the
best
strengthening
mechanisms
as
it
increases
both
strength
and
ductility.
37
38
At
the
nanomicro
scale:
Fracture
of
very
small
components
is
crucial
to
the
development
of
small
devices
and
it
is
here
that
much
interest
in
fracture
is
currently
focused.
Here
plasticity
is
also
crucial,
particularly
in
materials
with
limited
dislocation
mobility
(Si,
Ge,
Fe,
Cr,
Al2O3,
and
intermetallics)
essentially
everything
other
than
fcc
metals.
All
these
materials
display
very
brittle
behaviour
at
low
temperatures
and
a
transition
to
a
more
ductile
behaviour
as
temperature
rises.
Rice
introduced
the
concept
that
brittleness
was
determined
by
the
competition
at
the
crack
tip
between
the
generation
of
dislocations
in
the
very
high
stress
field
at
the
crack
tip
and
cleavage.
His
paper
of
1974
explains
the
issue
very
lucidly
(skip
the
mathematics
in
the
middle)
J.R.
Rice
and
R
Thomson,
Phil
Mag
29,
1,
p73,
(1974),
with
a
more
modern
interpretation
given
by
J.R.
Rice,
Journal
of
the
Mechanics
and
Physics
of
Solids,
V.40,
Iss.2
p.239271
(1992).
This
is
demonstrated
by
a
series
of
experiments
performed
by
Prof
Steve
Roberts
on
pure
iron
single
crystals.
(Acta.
Mat.
56
(2008)
5123)
4Pt
bending
with
precracked
single
crystals
of
specific
orientation
(2
slip
planes
at
45
to
the
crack
tip)
DBT indentified from examination of the fracture surface and evidence of slip bands
Activation energy correlates very well with that for dislocation movement
3
5 1
The
DBT
decreases
from
130K
at
the
lowest
strain
rate
to
154K
at
the
highest.
The
observed
behaviour
can
be
modeled
very
accurately
by
dislocation
dynamics.
This
means
calculating
the
distribution
and
movement
of
dislocations
during
the
test
from
their
initial
positions,
the
complete
stress
field
and
an
exponential
equation
for
dislocation
velocity.
Essentially
the
DBT
occurs
when
the
shielding
effect
of
the
dislocations
on
the
two
slip
planes
(i.e.
the
elastic
stress
fields
from
those
generated)
reduces
the
stress
at
the
crack
tip
sufficiently
rapidly
to
prevent
the
stress
at
the
tip
reaching
the
cleavage
stress.
39
FATIGUE
Fatigue
is
damage
(leading
to
failure)
caused
by
oscillating
stress
below
the
fracture
stress.
90%
of
all
mechanical
failures
can
be
attributed
to
fatigue.
Paradoxically,
although
the
stress
is
below
the
yield
stress,
fatigue
is
essentially
concerned
with
the
generation
of
defects
by
plastic
flow
and
the
movement
of
dislocations.
Stress
max
a
m
0
m
Time
min
The
diagram
above
defines
some
of
the
variables
used
to
describe
a
fatigue
test
run
under
stress
control:
the
stress
range
,
stress
amplitude
a,
mean
stress
m.
the
load
ratio
R
=
min/max
.
Similar
definitions
apply
to
tests
where
the
strain
on
the
sample
is
controlled
and
the
maximum
stress
may
vary
through
the
test.
Real
fatigue
situations
cover
a
baffling
range
of
variables;
examples
include
high
frequency
mechanical
fatigue
for
example
in
a
crankshaft,
to
low
frequency
pounding
of
a
northsea
oil
rig
structure
in
a
highly
corrosive
environment,
to
thermal
fatigue
caused
by
the
periodic
heating
and
cooling
in
the
turbine
of
a
transatlantic
jet
engine.
We
need
to
understand
fatigue
so
that
we
are
able
to:
i)
predict
the
engineering
life
of
these
components,
ii)
design
structures
and
materials
which
maximise
economic
life.
Factors
affecting
fatigue
which
we
will
consider
in
varying
degrees
of
detail
are:
Mean
stress
m
(or
Strain);
also
expressed
as
Load
Ratio:
R
=
min/max
Stress
amplitude
(or
strain
amplitude)
Frequency
Waveform
Temperature
Temperature
variation
Environment
corrosion
and
oxidation
Surface
finish
Coatings
Microstructure
40
Test
procedures
have
been
developed
which
address
these
variables
and
by
the
use
of
a
number
of
mostly
empirical
laws
these
are
able
to
provide
some
degree
of
predictability
in
most
situations.
Fatigue
conditions
fall
into
a
number
of
regimes:
High
Cycle
Fatigue
HCF:
Low
amplitude
stresses
induce
primarily
elastic
strains
which
results
in
long
life,
i.e.
endurance
in
excess
of
10,000cycles
Low
Cycle
Fatigue
LCF:
Significant
plastic
deformation
during
cyclic
loading
results
in
an
endurance
limit
below
10,000
cycles
and
behavior
dominated
by
plastic
deformation.
Thermomechanical
Fatigue
TMF:
varying
both
stress
and
temperature
to
give
strain
cycles
in
phase,
out
of
phase
(and
all
things
in
between)
with
the
temperature
cycle.
APPROACHES
TO
FATIGUE
We
can
break
Fatigue
in
ductile
materials
into
several
stages:
1. Initial
microstructural
changes
leading
to
the
nucleation
of
permanent
damage
2.
3.
4.
5.
Failure
Macroscopically
there
are
ambiguities
in
defining
the
initiation
and
growth
stages
of
cracks
depending
on
the
resolution
of
the
techniques
being
used
to
investigate.
Generally
stages
13
constitute
crack
initiation
and
stages
45
crack
growth.
Depending
on
the
conditions,
these
stages
occupy
widely
differing
fractions
of
the
sample
life
and
thus
require
different
strategies
to
determine
life.
The
method
adopted
also
depends
on
the
consequences
of
failure.
41
TOTALLIFE
OR
SAFELIFE:
This
strategy
is
to
predict
the
total
life
and
retire
the
component
at
a
fixed
proportion
of
this,
to
include
a
considerable
margin
for
error.
The
aim
is
to
retire
the
component
before
a
crack
forms
and
it
is
used
where
fatigue
failure
would
result
in
component
failure
and/or
where
crack
detection
is
difficult
or
expensive.
Totallife
can
be
wasteful
as
much
useful
life
remains
unused
where
the
scatter
in
the
data
is
large.
This
approach
focuses
on
predicting
the
number
of
cycles
to
failure,
N
for
an
initially
uncracked
specimen.
This
is
most
appropriate
where
the
initiation
of
the
dominant
crack
occupies
the
majority
of
the
total
life
(as
much
as
90%).
For
HCF
where
the
stress
range
is
low
and
the
stresses
principally
elastic,
the
stress
range
is
used
to
characterise
the
component
and
produce
a
reference
SN
curve.
For
higher
stresses
resulting
in
LCF
plastic
strain
is
extensive
and
the
strain
range
is
typically
(but
not
always)
used.
DAMAGETOLERANT
OR
FAILSAFE:
This
approach
recognises
that
all
structures
contain
defects
and
that
these
grow
at
stable
and
predictable
rates.
The
strategy
involves
periodic
inspection
of
the
structure
and
repairs
or
replaces
components
as
cracks
are
found.
This
is
generally
used
where
failure
would
not
result
in
component
failure
due
to
structural
redundancy.
A
greater
proportion
of
the
useful
life
is
used
and
the
risk
of
wrong
assumptions
in
the
predictive
process
are
dimished.
Thus
if
the
maximum
size
of
the
initial
defects
in
the
structure
is
known
(amax)
the
interval
between
inspections
is
determined
by
the
time
predicted
for
this
crack
to
achieve
critical
size
(t1).
The
component
may
survive
several
iterations
(two
in
the
case
below)
before
being
replaced.
Following
the
development
of
fracture
mechanics
for
monotonic
deformation
Paris
recognised
in
the
1960s
that
the
same
concepts
of
stress
intensity
could
be
applied
to
fatigue
to
estimate
the
fatigue
crack
growth
rate
and
thus
predict
the
time
taken
for
the
crack
to
reach
an
unstable
size.
42
log(da/dN)
PARIS
LAW
If
the
rate
of
crack
growth
is
measured
and
plotted
against
the
K
on
a
loglog
plot
the
curve
takes
the
general
sigmoidal
form
shown
below.
I:
Crack
initiation,
crack
at
Fracture
45
following
slip
planes
II:
Crack
propagates
at
I
II
III
90
to
tensile
axis,
m
striations
formed
III:
Final
rupture
KIc
log K
There
are
three
distinct
regions,
an
initial
stage
usually
showing
a
threshold
value
for
K,
a
2nd
stage
where
the
crack
growth
rate
shows
a
power
law
dependence
on
K
only;
and
a
final
stage
where
the
crack
growth
rate
approaches
infinity
as
the
K
reaches
KIc.
The
central
region
is
the
most
useful
as
it
allows
the
CGR
for
the
major
part
of
the
life
to
be
predicted
from
a
knowledge
of
the
conditions
at
the
crack
tip.
This
equation
is
known
as
the
Paris
Equation.
da
= CK m
dN
where
m
4
but
can
vary
from
27
for
various
materials.
This
implies
that
da/dN
does
not
depend
on
the
value
of
R.
This
is
not
strictly
the
case
particularly
for
low
values
of
R
where
the
crack
closes
during
the
cycle
(see
p59).
Note: Minors Law follows directly from the Paris Law see question sheet 2
43
Fatigue limit
ln N
BASQUINS
LAW
SN curve
The
curve
can
be
approximated
by
an
empirical
expression
due
to
Basquin:
where
f
is
the
fatigue
strength
coefficient
f
the
static
fracture
strength
and
b
takes
the
value
0.05
to
0.12
for
metals.
You
may
also
see
this
expression
written
in
terms
of
the
number
of
stress
reversals
i.e.
2Nf.
COFFIN
MANSON
LAW.
Under
conditions
of
high
plastic
deformation
we
have
low
cycle
fatigue
conditions
and
for
strain
controlled
tests,
Coffin
and
Manson
independently
noted
an
empirical
relation
very
similar
to
Basquins
law.
The
total
strain
amplitude
can
be
split
into
plastic
and
elastic
components:
e p
=
+
2
2
2
where
the
plastic
component
is
linear
when
plotted
against
the
log
(number
of
load
reversals),
2Nf
:
p
2
= f" (Nf )
Here
f
is
the
fatigue
ductility
component
and
roughly
equal
to
the
failure
ductility
in
tension,
and
c
takes
the
value
0.5
to
0.7
for
metals.
Adding
in
the
Basquins
law
for
the
elastic
(high
cycle
fatigue)
component
we
have:
b
c
f"
= (Nf ) + f" (Nf )
2 E
44
Plotting
log()
against
log
(2Nf)
gives
two
distinct
regimes,
at
low
strain
and
long
life
the
gradient
b
(0.1)
dominates,
HCF
conditions,
and
at
high
strain
and
short
life
the
gradient
is
c
(0.5).
The
transition
is
gradual
but
extrapolating
the
asymptotes
allows
a
transition
number
of
cycles,
2Nt,
to
be
identified.
Note:
fatigue
is
inherently
variable
variation
in
life
of
100%
is
not
unusual
for
nominally
the
same
test.
This
is
masked
by
the
widespread
use
of
log
plots.
The
intercepts
of
the
two
parts
of
the
curve
correspond
roughly
to:
1.
LCF:
the
total
strain,
plastic
and
elastic,
at
failure.
2.
HCF:
the
elastic
component
of
the
strain
at
failure
Lets
put
some
figures
in
here:
Aluminium 7075
72 GPa
193 MPa
1.8
0.106
0.690
Steel 0.15%C
210 GPa
827 MPa
0.95
0.110
0.640
Aluminium:
0.106
0.69
193
=
Nf )
+ 1.8 (Nf )
(
2 72000
(HCF
intercept
666
times
less
than
the
LCF
intercept

note
log
scale)
Steel:
0.11
0.64
827
=
Nf )
+ 0.95 (Nf )
(
2 210000
45
a = a  m =0 1 m
y
a = a  m =0 1 m
TS
46
GOODMAN
DIAGRAM
The
effect
of
mean
stress
and
R
value
can
be
expressed
on
a
Goodman
diagram
shown
below:
max
min
TEMPERATURE
Temperature
has
environmental
effects
on
fatigue
developed
later.
It
is
possible
to
adjust
for
the
simple
effect
on
yield
stress
where
the
nature
of
fatigue
does
not
change
by
normalizing
the
applied
stress
with
the
yield
stress.
Plotting
against
/y
often
collapses
datasets
to
the
same
curve.
47
time
m
ni
N
i=1
= 1
Miners Law
fi
This
is
useful
as
a
first
approximation
but
has
serious
shortcomings;
the
most
importantis
that
no
account
can
be
taken
of
the
impact
of
prior
damage
on
the
later
exposure
at
a
different
stress
(or
strain)
amplitude.
In
particular
the
balance
between
crack
initiation
and
crack
growth
can
vary
considerably
with
stress,
thus
brief
exposure
to
high
amplitude
may
nucleate
damage
which
at
a
lower
stress
would
not
occur
until
a
much
later
stage
and
thus
accelerate
the
damage
rate
at
a
subsequent
lower
stress.
Conversely,
early
exposure
to
low
stress
amplitude
may
strain
harden
the
material
and
thus
prolong
life
during
later
high
amplitude
exposure.
This
emphasizes
the
importance
of
looking
at
the
specific
mechanisms
of
damage
and
how
it
accumulates
in
the
material.
48
Cyclic hardening
Typically
materials
harden
if
Cyclic softening
UTS
To
understand
why
this
occurs
we
need
to
consider
dislocation
microstructure
of
the
material.
From
the
above
materials
where
the
initial
state
is
highly
work
hardened
the
dislocation
density
is
high,
the
effect
of
the
cyclic
strain
is
to
allow
the
rearrangement
of
the
dislocations
into
stable
networks,
reducing
the
stress
at
which
the
plastic
component
occurs,
and
thus
the
effective
stress.
Conversely
where
the
initial
dislocation
density
is
low,
(soft
material)
the
cyclic
strain
increases
the
dislocation
density
increasing
the
amount
of
elastic
strain
and
the
stress
on
the
material.
For
a
given
alloy
both
hard
and
soft
materials
tend
to
a
stable
dislocation
configuration.
For
example,
detailed
work
on
the
development
of
dislocation
configurations
in
copper
and
shows
that
a
stable
Labyrinth
structure
develops
(see
the
figure
on
page
52
from
Suresh,
chapter
2)
49
As
the
fatigue
establishes
a
stable
microstructure
the
hysteresis
loop
becomes
stable
at
some
point
during
the
test.
When
this
stable
loop
is
plotted
as
a
function
of
increasing
stress
(or
strain)
the
locus
of
the
maximum
values
from
a
series
of
tests
defines
a
cyclic
stress
strain
curve.
50
BAUSCHINGER
EFFECT
t
b
c
c
c
c < t
c < t
Strain
control
first
cycle
showing
the
Bauschinger
effect.
During
cyclic
deformation
the
material
can
retain
a
memory
of
the
initial
plastic
strain
which
reduces
the
stress
at
which
plastic
yield
occurs
in
the
reverse
cycle.
This
effect
can
persist
for
many
cycles
and
is
known
as
the
BAUSCHINGER
EFFECT.
This
reversible
but
plastic
deformation
can
occur
by
dislocation
pileups
at,
for
example,
incoherent
or
semicoherent
precipitates
exerting
a
backstress
which
assists
plastic
yield
in
compression.
This
reduces
the
yield
stress
in
compression.
51
For
high
SFE
materials
the
cell
size
is
a
decreasing
function
of
the
strain
range
and
ultimately
does
not
depend
on
the
starting
microstructure.
Very
low
SFE
e.g.
Cu
7.5%
Al,
materials
do
not
form
stable
cell
structures,
the
highly
dissociated
dislocations
being
arranged
in
planar
arrays
where
the
spacing
depends
on
the
initial
state.
The
microstructures
and
lives
are
thus
very
sensitive
to
the
prior
deformation
state.
52
(a) OP (0.4)
Here
cutting
of
precipitates
early
in
this
test
(TMF
of
Nimonic
90)
has
caused
the
to
dissolve
leaving
precipitate
free
channels
in
the
alloy.
The
precipitates
are
visible
from
the
dislocations
wrapped
around
them
53
CRACK
MORPHOLOGY
The
three
regions
can
be
identified
from
the
morphology
of
the
fracture
surface.
I.
Initiation;
crack
initiates
at
intrusions
and
follows
slip
plane
at
approximately
45
to
principle
stress
direction.
When
the
length
is
sufficient
for
the
stress
field
at
the
tip
to
become
dominant
the
overall
crack
plane
becomes
perpendicular
to
the
principle
stress
and
the
crack
enters
stage
II.
II.
Growth
typically
showing
striations
for
each
cycle
and
beach
marks
at
points
where
conditions
changed.
Striations
may
be
obscured
by
closure
damage
or
by
oxide
formation
at
high
temperatures.
III.
Final
failure
ductile
or
brittle
rupture
associated
with
fast
fracture.
Crack
Stage II
Intrusions and
extrusions
Crack Stage I
Crack
stage
I
growth
at
45
to
stress
axis,
following
persistent
slip
bands,
during
stage
II
turns
to
growth
normal
to
stress
axis.
Formation
of
striations
by
ductile
flow
during
crack
growth
WARNING:
Crack
morphologies
can
differ
from
this
simple
formula
having
more
or
fewer
stages.
Not
all
fatigue
failures
show
striations
or
a
clear
stage
I.
There
may
also
be
different
morphologies
as
K
or
the
microstructure
change.
54
Diagram
showing
the
formation
of
intrusions
and
extrusions
at
a
persistent
slip
band.
In
the
vast
majority
of
cases
fatigue
initiates
on
the
surface,
however
cracks
can
sometimes
initiate
internally
at
defects
cracked
precipitates
of
internal
porosity.
The
crack
then
grows
under
vacuum
until
it
reaches
an
external
surface.
This
gives
a
characteristic
circular
area
on
the
fracture
surface.
Once
the
crack
becomes
a
surface
crack
and
air
is
admitted
and
the
stress
intensity
increases
and
the
growth
rate
increases.
This
sometimes
leads
to
immediate
failure.
55
EFFECTS
OF
OXIDATION
AND
CORROSION
The
absence
of
a
fatigue
limit
is
normally
and
indication
of
material
which
is
immune
from
corrosion
or
oxidation
effects
otherwise
the
mere
passage
of
time
will
eventually
allow
the
initiation
and
propagation
of
cracks
even
at
very
low
stress.
At
high
temperatures
oxidation
at
grain
boundaries,
Carbides
or
as
in
the
single
crystal
above,
in
areas
where
the
composition
varies
slightly,
results
in
crack
initiation.
The
oxide
layer
cracks
and
the
crack
propagates
into
the
substrate
thus
allowing
further
oxidation.
56
DESIGN
AGAINST
INITIATION
Where
initiation
occupies
most
of
the
life
of
the
sample,
initiation
control,
any
measure
which
reduces
crack
nucleation
will
extend
life.
Surface
damage,
even
scratches
can
act
as
stress
concentrators
and
lead
to
local
plastic
deformation
and
crack
initiation.
High
cycle
fatigue
is
very
sensitive
to
surface
finish
and
can
be
extended
by
polished
surface
finish.
Corrosion
protection
to
suppress
the
formation
of
cracks
at
interfaces
by
preferential
attack
Treatments
which
induce
a
residual
compressive
stress
in
the
surface
layer
will
extend
life
by
reducing
the
mean
stress
at
the
surface
and
delaying
the
onset
of
cracking.
Carburising,
Nitriding,
shot
peening.
Coatings
have
different
stress
and/or
thermal
response
to
the
imposed
stress
may
crack.
The
crack
can
act
as
a
stress
concentrator
and
promote
early
cracking.
Thermal
barrier
coatings
accelerate
HCF
failure.
Pores
act
as
stress
concentrators
and
a
major
source
of
fatigue
cracks
in
single
crystal
superalloys:
remove
by
HIPING.
As
with
fracture
plastic
deformation
in
the
matrix
can
cause
cracking
of
carbides
and
the
nucleation
of
cracks.
57
In
predicting
the
life
of
a
component
we
have
to
consider
the
possibility
that
the
material
is
subject
to
other
degradation
processes
such
as
corrosion,
oxidation
or
creep
which
affect
the
crack
growth.
Damage
usually
accelerates
crack
growth,
but
can
repair
and
mitigate
the
effects
of
the
other
process.
Tests
investigating
these
effects
compare
behaviour
in
vacuum
with
that
in
air
or
other
damaging
environments.
Alternatively,
introducing
a
dwell
time
at
maximum
and
or
minimum
stress
can
change
the
crack
growth
rate.
The
higher
the
test
frequency
the
smaller
the
possible
contribution
from
creep/corrosion
will
be
and
a
strong
dependence
of
life
on
the
frequency
can
indicate
some
other
contribution.
(This
may
also
show
up
as
a
mismatch
between
HCF
and
LCF
data
when
plotted
on
the
same
graph
as
on
page
47.)
CREEP
Creep
can
increase
or
decrease
fatigue
life:
possible
mechanisms
of
interaction
are:
An
increase
in
dislocation
density
due
to
fatigue
can
increase
creep
rate
through
dislocation
movement
and
/or
enhanced
diffusion.
Increasing
dislocation
density
can
also
decrease
primary
creep
(see
earlier).
Cutting
of
grain
boundary
porosity
increasing
the
growth
rate
of
the
pores
Blunting
of
crack
tip
by
creep
can
reduce
crack
growth
rate
and
hence
fatigue
damage
rate.
Graph
of
a
constant
strain
fatigue
test
with
a
dwell
at
both
the
upper
and
lower
temperatures.
During
the
dwell
the
specimen
creeps
to
reduce
the
stress.
58
OXIDATION:
Allvac
718Plus:
Fatigue
of
this
Nibased
alloy
deformed
with
3s
cycle
(3S)
and
same
plus
100
s
dwell
(3S+100)
at
650C.
Here
the
effects
are
due
to
oxidation
at
the
crack
tip.
The
two
heat
treatments
A1
and
A3
respond
differently
to
the
3
s
cycle
but
the
dwell
removes
this
difference.
At
low
temperatures
water
can
have
a
profound
effect
on
the
crack
growth
rate.
Hydrogen
embrittlement
in
steels
is
a
good
example.
The
electrochemical
cell
set
up
within
the
crack
allows
H
to
enter
the
metal
and
diffuse
ahead
of
the
crack
tip.
The
resulting
hardening
enhances
crack
growth.
The
apparent
activation
energies
for
the
crack
growth
rate
match
those
for
H
diffusion.
59
Al
alloy
fatigue
tested
in
Argon
and
damp
air
the
water
vapour
accelerates
crack
growth
above
a
threshold
of
~
2.0
Pa
but
the
effect
becomes
saturated
at
6.9
Pa.
Studies
analysing
the
surface
show
a
similar
trend
in
the
oxides
formed
at
the
newly
exposed
crack
tips.
CRACK
CLOSURE
The
plastic
deformation
at
the
fracture
surface,
distortion
or
oxide
growth
during
exposure
can
all
act
to
cause
the
crack
faces
to
touch
before
the
elastic
deformations
of
the
sample
would
predict.
This
means
that
the
stress
intensity
range
is
effectively
reduced.
Clearly
this
will
have
a
greater
effect
the
closer
the
minimum
stress
intensity
is
to
zero.
Kmax
Keff
Kop
Closure
Kmin
Time
Crack
Closure:
Effective
stress
range
where
crack
does
not
fully
close.
The
Paris
equation
can
be
modified
to
use
a
reduced
value
of
the
stress
intensity
factor
Keff.
da
m
= CK meff = C(UK )
dN
where
U=
K eff
K
60
Plasticity
Mode II displacement
Oxide debris
The
crack
growth
rate
curves
below
have
been
measured
at
different
R
ratios
this
gives
rise
to
different
amounts
of
crack
closure.
All
the
data
can
by
condensed
onto
a
single
line
by
judicious
use
of
Keff.
Usually
suitable
U
values
are
fitted
experimentally.
61
dW
The
modelling
gives
that
K 4 ,
in
line
with
the
Paris
law.
dN
62
We
use
the
dimensionless
energy
loss
per
cycle
dW*/dN
to
include
the
constant
of
proportionality:
" 2E % dW
dW
* = $$ y 4 ''
dN
# K & dN
Real
fatigue
crack
growth
data
from
a
variety
of
alloys
and
load
ratios
is
plotted
using
normalised
axes
for
da/dN*
and
K*
as
follows:
2
'
*
da
da )! K Ic $ dW ,
#
&
*=
/
*
and
K * = K / K Ic
dN
dN )#" y &% dN ,
(
+
2
"K %
4 dW
da
E (K *)4 (K Ic )4 dW
$$ Ic '' ( K *)
= 2
*
=
*
2
dN K Ic
yE
dN
dN
#y &
4 dW
da
* = ( K *)
*
dN
dN
The
figure
below
shows
that
by
plotting
log10(da/dN)*
against
log10K*
the
data
for
Ti64,
Al
7475,
Stainless
steel
(155PH
H1025)
and
a
Nickel
alloy
(Inconel
718)
collapses
pretty
much
onto
a
line
of
slope
4
passing
through
(1,1)
vindicating
the
basic
assumption.
Given
the
simplicity
of
the
plastic
model
this
is
very
impressive
and
emphasises
that
fracture
and
fatigue
are
driven
by
the
same
microstructural
factors.
It
does
a
better
job
relating
the
alloys
than
resolving
the
load
ratio
effects.
QUESTION SHEETS
1
3
2
o a
where the crack lies in the x2 direction along the x2x3 plane. Convince yourself
(r, q) the shear stress 12 is finite, where is the shear
that at a general position
stress zero?
Assuming a state of plane stress, i.e. 3 = 0, find the expressions for the principal
stresses 1 and 2, i.e. the maximum values of the normal stresses when the shear
stresses are zero. This can be done by diagonalising the stress tensor or more
simply by using Mohrs circle, ( is the angle between the direction vector and
the y axis 2).
For conditions of plane strain write down an estimate for the outofplane
principal stress 3 (3 = [1 + 2]) and thus demonstrate that it is nonzero.
Hence demonstrate that the hydrostatic component of the stress tensor is larger in
plane strain that in plane stress.
(b) Using the result from (a) for the principal stresses combine these using the
Tresca yield criteria (max min) = y. Hence plot out the shapes and relative
sizes of the plastic zone in the x1x2 plane under conditions of (i) plane stress and,
(if time and patience allow) (ii) plane strain, for a nonworkhardening material.
On which planes does the plastic deformation occur in the two cases?
The Tresca yield criterion looks at the maximum difference between the principal
stresses and assumes that yield occurs when this reaches the tensile yield stress.
Take Poissons ratio as 0.3. For a reminder on the use of Mohrs circle try the
DoITPoMS site:
http://www.doitpoms.ac.uk/tlplib/metalforming1/index.php
QUESTION SHEETS
QUESTION SHEETS
3 a) A wedge driven into a preexisting crack along the grain of piece of wood
opens up the crack and eventually causes the wood to split along the grain.
Sketch how the stored elastic energy varies as the wedge is driven in both before
and after the crack starts to grow. Plot U against x. Assume that the crack lies very
close and parallel to the straight edge of the wood and that all the strain is in the
thinner layer of wood.
The elastic energy stored, UE, in a cantilevered beam of depth d opened by a
Ed 3 h 2B
wedge of height h is given by: UE =
(B is the width into the page)
8a 3
b) Derive an expression for the energy release rate as the crack grows. Will the
crack grow in a stable or unstable manner as the wedge is driven in at a steady
rate?
It is found that the crack starts to grow when the wedge is on average 100 mm
from the crack tip, i.e. a = 100 mm. If the modulus of the wood along the grain is
10 GPa, d = 5 mm and h = 3 mm estimate the resistance to crack growth R of the
wood along the grain. Hence estimate the toughness.
c) A manufacturer of disposable chopsticks makes them from the same wood
leaving a small section of wood joining the pair for the user to break. He wants to
ensure that the two sticks will be easy to separate along the grain.
Show that the force required to pull the two sticks apart as shown in the diagram
# Ed 3R &1/ 2 B
is given by the expression Fmax = %
(
$ 43' a
If the length of the cut between the two sticks is 200 mm and the sticks are a
square section of 5 mm calculate the force.
QUESTION SHEETS
QUESTION SHEETS
Where is the alternating stress intensity in MPam1/2. The initial crack size
(half length) a = 2mm and the critical size at which failure occurs acrit = 10mm.
the expression between fixed limits show that the SN curve is
By integrating
given by:
logN = 3log + 13.647
A component of this steel containing initial cracks of half length 2mm is
subjected to 5 105 cycles at an alternating tensile stress, , of 354 MNm2 and
to 5 106 cycles at 164.3 MNm2. Given a critical crack length of 10 mm show,
by integration of the crack growth rate or otherwise, that Miners law is satisfied
regardless of the order in which the fatigue cycles occur.
(You might like to try proving Minors law generally for any combination of
stresses)
QUESTION SHEETS
As a general rule the fatigue tolerance of a material scales with the yield stress.
A new alloy Wondalloy is available for turbine disks with a higher yield stress
which will allow a maximum cyclic stress range of 1000 MPa , increased from
the value of 800 MPa for the existing alloy Mundalloy (for this application R =
0). The fatigue crack growth rates for both alloys is given by the equation:
da
= AK 4
dN
where the constant A = 2.5 x 1014 for Mundalloy
i)
ii)
If Wondalloy is to be used with an increased stress range but with the same
service interval of 5,000 cycles what are the implications for the detection of the
minimum flaw size? Use the value for A calculated above.
iii)
iv)
Bien plus que des documents.
Découvrez tout ce que Scribd a à offrir, dont les livres et les livres audio des principaux éditeurs.
Annulez à tout moment.