Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

www.elsevier.com/locate/engfracmech

A general mixed-mode brittle fracture criterion

for cracked materials
Jun Chang a, Jin-quan Xu
a

a,*

, Yoshiharu Mutoh

School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil Engineering, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200240, China
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Nagaoka University of Technology, Niigata 1603-1, Japan
Received 17 October 2005; received in revised form 8 December 2005; accepted 22 December 2005
Available online 9 February 2006

Abstract
In order to predict the fracture direction and fracture loadings of cracked materials under the general mixed-mode state,
this paper presents a new general mixed-mode brittle fracture criterion based on the concept of maximum potential energy
release rate (MPERR). This criterion can be easily degraded to the pure-mode fracture criterion, and can also be reduced
to the commonly accepted fracture criteria for the mixed-mode I/II state. In order to validate the proposed criterion, we
have carried out the experiments with aluminium alloy specimens under various mixed-mode loading conditions. The
experimental results agree well with the predictions of the proposed criterion.
2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Crack; Stress intensity factor (SIF); Fracture criterion; Mixed-mode; Potential energy release rate

1. Introduction
The fracture criterion is the primary basis of the safe evaluation in cracked materials. A theoretically integrated fracture criterion shall be capable of predicting both fracture direction and fracture loadings of cracked
structures under various combined loading conditions. For the pure-mode cases, it has been commonly
accepted that fracture will occur when the corresponding SIF reaches its critical value, but the fracture direction is not indicated, though we know empirically that fracture occurs along the extension of the crack under
mode I or III, while branch fracture occurs under mode II. For a crack under the mixed-mode I/II loading
conditions, a number of fracture criteria have been developed through a concerted eort by many researchers
in the past decades. Erdogan and Sih [1] proposed the maximum circumferential stress (MCS) criterion, which
assumed that fracture occurs in the direction where the circumferential stress surrounding the crack tip is the
maximum. Smith et al. [2] developed a generalized maximum tensile stress criterion by taking T-stress into
consideration. Alternatively, the minimum strain energy density (MSED) criterion introduced by Sih [3,4]
*

Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +86 21 54747252.

E-mail address: jqxu@sjtu.edu.cn (J.-q. Xu).

0013-7944/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.engfracmech.2005.12.011

1250

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

Nomenclature
a
E
l
m
j
E0
G
GC
Gh
Ki
KiC
Ke
S
SC
W
c
w

crack length
Youngs modulus
shear modulus
Poissons ratio
= 3  4m for plane strain, = (3  m)/(1 + m) for plane stress
=E/(1  m2) for plane strain, =E for plane stress
energy release rate
critical value of energy release rate
energy release rate in h direction
SIF of mode i(i = I, II, III)
fracture toughness (i = I, II, III)
eective SIF
strain energy density factor
critical value of strain energy density factor
strain energy density
mode ratio angle, tan1(K
)
 II/KIq

1
mode ratio angle, tan
K III = K 2I K 2II

dk
Da
hf
H

opening displacement of the kinked crack face in k direction (k = r, h, z)

crack extension
fracture angle
function determining the fracture direction

assumed that fracture occurs in the direction where the strain energy density is the minimum. Hussain et al. [5],
Palaniswamy and Knauss [6], Nuismer [7] and Wu [8] proposed the maximum energy release rate (MERR)
criterion based on Griths theory [9]. The aforementioned criteria are reviewed and discussed in Gdoutoss
book [10] reecting on their limitations and applications. Recently, Sutton et al. [11] developed the crack tip
opening displacement (CTOD) criterion based on a detailed analysis of crack kinking in arbitrary directions,
and assumed that the crack growth occurs when the current CTOD reaches a critical value. Besides, to assess
the crack propagation in elasticplastic materials under mixed-mode loading, Li et al. [12] developed the JMp
based criterion using J-integral and the plastic parameter Mp as basic fracture parameters. The simplied Jestimation equations, proposed by Kim et al. [13] based on the engineering treatment model [14], developed
the J-integral fracture criterion for homogeneous and mismatched structures. On the other hand, for a crack
under the mixed-mode I/III, or under three-mode mixed loading conditions, which are common in engineering
structures, only few fracture criteria have been proposed so far. Tian [15] has proposed a fracture criterion
based on the principal stress factor for mixed-mode I/III crack problems. Deng et al. [16] have tried to extend
their two-dimensional CTOD-Based fracture criterion [11,17] and simulation tools into the three-dimensional
realm. Sih [18] has extended the MSED criterion to the three-dimensional problems. Schollmann [19,20]
recently developed the maximum principle stress r01 criterion for the three-dimensional crack growth, and
the criterion has been examined by computational simulation and experiments [21]. In order to carry out
mixed I/II fracture tests with a wide range of mixtures, Richard [22] developed a loading xture, and Schwalbe
and Cornec [23] proposed a method using specimens with an inclined crack. However, the fracture theory and
experimental method for mixed three-mode conditions have not been yet well-established.
The aim of this paper is to establish a brittle fracture theory applicable for the general mixed-mode loading
conditions. Such a criterion, of course, shall be continuous to the well-known pure or mixed-mode fracture
criterion. Therefore, we investigate the advantages and limitations of the existing mixed-mode I/II fracture
criteria rstly in Section 2, to check if they are appropriate to be extended to the three-mode mixed loading
conditions. Based on the investigations, it is found that the MERR theory has clear physical meanings, though

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

1251

the mathematical expression of the energy release rate Gh in an arbitrary direction is dicult to be obtained.
By introducing the approximate form of the energy release rate Gh, the general mixed-mode fracture criterion
is presented in terms of the SIFs KI, KII and KIII in Section 3. Finally, the proposed criterion is examined by
experiments with the cracked aluminium alloy specimens under various mixed-mode loading conditions. It is
found that the theoretical predictions and experimental data agree well with each other.
2. Investigations on the existing mixed-mode criteria
2.1. General remarks
The crack-tip stress and displacement elds are the bases to establish fracture criteria for cracked structures. We consider the general mixed-mode loading conditions with three modes I, II and III. In terms of
the polar coordinates r and h at the crack tip located at point O (as shown in Fig. 1), the stress components
of the crack-tip stress eld can be written as
 



1
KI
h
3h
K II
h
3h
rrr p
5 cos  cos
5 sin 3 sin

2
2
2
2
4
2pr 4
 



1
KI
h
3h
K II
h
3h
rhh p
3 cos cos
3 sin  3 sin

2
2
2
2
4
2pr 4
1
 



1
KI
h
3h
K II
h
3h
rrh p
sin sin
cos 3 cos

2
2
2
2
4
2pr 4
K III
h
rhz p cos ;
2
2pr

K III
h
rrz p sin
2
2pr

Since the stress and displacement elds near the crack tip can be expressed by SIFs, the brittle fracture criterion can be certainly described by them. Under the three-mode mixed loading conditions, the general form of
the fracture criterion can be expressed as
hf HK I ; K II ; K III ; f K I ; K II ; K III C

Here KI, KII and KIII are the SIFs of the pure-mode I, II and III, respectively, C is a critical value of the material constant, hf denotes the fracture initiation direction, and H, f are the functions to be determined. In Eq.
(2), the rst part determines the fracture direction, and the second part determines the fracture loadings. Both
the pure-mode and the existing mixed-mode fracture criteria are just the special cases of Eq. (2) for dierent
loading conditions.
2.2. Maximum circumferential stress criterion
The fracture criterion assumed that fracture occurs in the direction where the circumferential stress is the
maximum surrounding the crack tip. Buczek and Herakovich [24], Saouma et al. [25], Beuth and Herakovich
[26] and Carloni and Nobile [27], etc., have extended this criterion to cracked orthotropic materials for plane
problems. The criterion can be expressed as

y
z

Fig. 1. The coordinate at the crack tip.

1252

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

!


orhh 
o2 rhh 
0
<0 ;
oh hhf
oh2 hhf

K h max
rhh max rhh jhhf p ;
2pr

K h max P K IC

3a

By substituting Eq. (1) into Eq. (3a), one can get the fracture criterion for cracked homogenous materials as
H K I sin hf K II 3 cos hf  1 0
 



1
hf
3
hf
3
K IC
f K I 3 cos cos hf  3K II sin sin hf
4
2
2
2
2

3b

Here KIC is the fracture toughness of the material. This criterion can well-predict the fracture direction and
loadings for the mixed-mode I/II conditions. However, if three modes coexist, it is clear that KIII cannot be
considered since the mode III has no eect on the circumferential stress. Therefore, the MCS criterion is just
a special theory applicable only for the mixed-mode I/II conditions, and not suitable to be extended into threemode mixed cases.
2.3. Minimum strain energy density criterion
The MSED criterion states that fracture occurs in the direction where the strain energy density becomes the
minimum. For the mixed-modes I and II, the strain energy density near the crack tip can be written as
1
S
W rij eij ;
2
r
1 
S
1 cos hj  cos hK 2I 2 sin h2 cos h  j 1K I K II
16pl

j 11  cos h 1 cos h3 cos h  1K 2II
where S is the strain energy density factor, and eij(i, j = r, h, z) are strain components.
According to reference [3,4], the MSED criterion can be expressed as
!


oS 
o2 S 
0
> 0 ; S min Sjhhf S C
ohhhf
oh2 hhf

where SC is the critical value of strain energy density factor. The distribution of strain energy density factors
along the h direction is shown in Fig. 2, where m is Poissons ratio. It can be found that the angle where S
becomes extreme is not unique. The relative smaller angle (absolute value) corresponds to larger extreme,
and is near to the MCS direction. Thus, by taking this angle as the fracture direction, one can obtain the criterion almost similar to the MCS criterion, except for the pure-mode II case. However, the angle where S becomes the minimum is quite dierent from the fracture direction. For example, when KI = KII, the angle where
S becomes the minimum is h = 118, which is dierent from the fracture direction h = 62.
6

16 S/( KI +KII)

=0.3
Plane strain

=90
=60

=45

=30

=0
(Degree)

0
-150

-100

-50

50

100

150

Fig. 2. The distribution of strain energy density factors in the h direction.

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

1253

On the other hand, Sih [18] has extended the MSED criterion into three-dimensional realm. Wang and
Hadeld [28,29] have adopted the extended criterion to predict the crack growth direction of ring crack in silicon nitride. Obviously, such an extension is valid only by taking the relative smaller angle where S becomes
extreme as the fracture direction.
The strain energy density factor under mixed three modes can be expressed as [18]
1 
1 cos hj  cos hK 2I 2 sin h2 cos h  j 1K I K II
S
16pl

j 11  cos h 1 cos h3 cos h  1K 2II 4K 2III
6
From the above expression, if one extends the minimum S theory to three-mode mixed criterion, one can easily nd that KIII only has eect on fracture loadings, but has no eect on fracture direction. This result will
lead to an obvious contradiction for KIII dominating fracture (e.g., the case of large KIII with very small
KII). Therefore, the MSED criterion is also not appropriate to be extended to three-mode mixed conditions.
2.4. The empirical elliptical criterion
Besides the fracture criteria mentioned above, the elliptical criterion is widely applied in engineering for its
simple form. This criterion is summarized from the experimental results, and can be described as

2 
2 
2
KI
K II
K III

1
7
K IC
K IIC
K IIIC
However, the elliptical criterion has some limitations. It is not theoretically integrated because it cannot predict the fracture direction. Furthermore, the relationship of three fracture toughness values is not claried in
the criterion.
2.5. Maximum energy release rate criterion
Assuming a crack propagates a unit length along its extension, the energy release rate can be given as

E
Plane stress
1 2
1 2
2
0
G 0 K I K II K III ; E
8
2
E
2l
E=1  m Plane strain
where E, m are Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio, respectively. However, this energy release rate cannot be
used directly since the practical fracture direction under mixed-mode conditions is generally not the extension
direction. Hence, many researchers [58] have proposed the MERR fracture criterion by taking the fracture
direction into account. The MERR criterion states that fracture will occur along the direction where the energy release rate is the maximum, and when the energy release rate reaches a critical value. Here, the energy
release rate is dened as the released energy when crack propagates a kinked unit length. The criterion can be
described as
hf hjGh Gh max ;

Gh max P GC

However, it is very dicult to calculate the energy release rate Gh. Based on the physical meanings, if the crack
kinks into the h direction, Gh can be expressed as (referred to Fig. 3):

y
Crack length a

Fig. 3. Sketch for calculating Gh.

1254

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

1
Gh lim
Da!0 2Da

Z
0

Da

1
rhh adh a Da rrh adr a Da rhz adz a Da dn
2

10

where rij(a) is the crack-tip stress eld before the crack kinks, dk(k = r, h, z) is the opening displacement of the
kinked crack face in k direction. As Gdoutos [10] has pointed out, however, the strict mathematical expression
of Gh is nearly impossible to be obtained, and may even lose its physical meanings when considering Da ! 0.
Usually, Gh can be only calculated by huge numerical analyses with taking the approximate limitation of
Da ! 0.
For all that, the MERR criterion has a rm theoretical basis of energy balance. Compared with other
existed criteria, it is more suitable to be extended to the case of three-mode mixity, if one can give the mathematical expression of Gh. Therefore, we select the MERR criterion as the theoretical basis to establish the general brittle fracture criterion, by introducing an approximate expression of Gh.
3. A general fracture criterion
3.1. The approximate expression of energy release rate and fracture criterion
To establish the fracture criterion based on MPERR concept, we have to give the expression of Gh. Here,
we focus on an approximate form of Gh.
Introducing the eective SIFs, KIe, KIIe and KIIIe, the stress components in the h direction can be rewritten as
 



K Ieff
KI
h
3
K II
h
3
3 cos cos h
3 sin  3 sin h
rhh p ; K Ieff
2
2
2
2
4
4
2pr
 



K IIeff
KI
h
3
K II
h
3
11
rrh p ; K IIeff
sin sin h
cos 3 cos h
2
2
2
2
4
4
2pr
K IIIeff
h
rhz p ; K IIIeff K III cos
2
2pr
Eq. (11) implies that the stresses in the h direction are, respectively, equivalent to the crack-tip stresses with
SIFs KIe, KIIe, KIIIe. Hence, the energy release rate Gh in h direction for a crack under mixed KI, KII, KIII
states can be approximately assumed to be the same as the energy release rate of a crack under KIe, KIIe,
KIIIe with propagation in its extension direction. With this postulate, we can easily obtain G(h) from Eq. (8)
1
j 1 2
K Ieff K 2IIeff K 2IIIeff
8l
2l
 


2
j 1 KI
h
3
K II
h
3
3 cos cos h
3 sin  3 sin h

8l
2
2
2
2
4
4
 


2
j 1 KI
h
3
K II
h
3
K2
h
sin sin h
cos 3 cos h

III cos2
8l
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
2l

Gh 

The above equation can be simplied as



1
h j 1 2
Gh
cos2
K I 1 cos h  4K I K II sin h K 2II 5  3 cos h K 2III
2l
2
8

12

13

with the approximate expression of G(h), we can establish the general fracture criterion based on the MERR
criterion as
!


oGh
o2 Gh
0
< 0 ; Ghf GC
14
oh hhf
oh2 hhf

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

1255

By substituting Eq. (13) into (14), we can get the general fracture criterion as

 


j1 2
hf
3
3
3
hf
hf
2
K I sin sin hf 4K I K II cos hf  K II 3 sin hf  5 sin
H
K 2III sin 0
8
2
2
2
2
2
2




1
hf j 1 2
j1 2
cos2
K I 1 cos hf  4K I K II sin hf K 2II 5  3 cos hf K 2III GC
K IC
f
2l
8
8l
2
15
3.2. Comparisons with the existing criteria
Considering the pure-mode I, II and III loading conditions, respectively, we can obtain the fracture direction and fracture loadings from Eq. (15)
hf jK II K III 0 0;

j1 2
j1 2
K I GC
K IC
8l
8l

or

K I K IC

p
3
4 2
1
2
K IC
K II K IC or K II K IIC
hf jK I K III 0  cos 1=3;
2
3
p
4
j1
K 2 K 2IC or K III K IIIC
K IC
hf jK I K II 0 0;
j 1 III
2

16
17
18

That is, the general fracture criterion is continuous to commonly accepted pure-mode fracture criteria. Moreover, the toughness KIC, KIIC and KIIIC are not independent, they have relationships with each other as shown
in Eqs. (16)(18).
For the mixed-mode I/II case, the extreme value condition of Gh can be deduced from Eq. (15)

hf
K I sin hf K II 3 cos hf  1K I 1 cos hf  K II sin hf  cos 0
19a
2
in which the maximum value condition of Gh is
H K I sin hf K II 3 cos hf  1 0

19b

From the above equation, we can work out the fracture angle hf (where srh = 0 in fact). The fracture occurs
when
 


2
j 1 KI
h
3
K II
h
3
j1 2
K IC
3 cos cos h
3 sin  3 sin h
f Ghf
GC
20
8l
2
2
2
2
8l
4
4
Eqs. (19b) and (20) are identical with the MCS criterion [1]. Therefore, the MCS criterion can be regarded as a
degraded form of the criterion presented here.
It is worth to point out that the approximate form of energy release rate shown in Eq. (20) is strictly different from that obtained by considering the branched extension Da ! 0 [30]. However, the dierence appears
meaningfully only for the KII dominant cases. Hussiain et al. [5] has compared the fracture curves based on
MCS and MERR (considering branched extension) theories with experiment results. Their results show that
the dierence between MCS and MERR fracture curves is not so large even for the KII dominant cases, though
both these two theories are somewhat dierent from the experiment results for the cases near to pure-mode II.
Since the present criterion is identical to MCS theory for the pure-mode, such a dierence still remains. In
other words, MERR theory, with or without considering the branched extension, may need to be improved
for the KII dominant cases if high evaluation accuracy is required.
For the mixed-mode I/III loading conditions, Eq. (15) gives out
hf 0;

Ghf

j 1 2 K 2III
j1 2
KI
K IC
GC
8l
8l
2l

21

1256

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

The second part can be rearranged into the following form:

p

2 
2
j1
KI
K III
K IC

1; K IIIC
K IC
K IIIC
2

22

That is, the elliptical fracture criterion has a theoretical basis under the mixed-mode I/III loadings.
3.3. Mixed-mode fracture curves
For convenience, the mode ratio angles are introduced as follows

q
c tan1 K II =K I ; w tan1 K III = K 2I K 2II
Then the SIFs can be expressed in terms of c and w
q
K I K 2I K 2II K 2III cos c cos w
q
K II K 2I K 2II K 2III sin c cos w
q
K III K 2I K 2II K 2III sin w
The fracture criterion given by Eq. (15) can be rewritten as




j1
3
hf
3
hf
2
2
cos w 2 sin
hf 2c 1 4 sin c sin  sin hf sin2 w sin 0
H
8
2
2
2
2






K 2I K 2II K 2III
h
j

1
h
h
f
f
f
cos2 w 3  4 sin sin
f
cos2
2c  cos hf sin2 w GC
8
2l
2
2
2

23

24

25a
25b

The expression equivalent to Eq. (25b) is

f K 2eff

4K 2I K 2II K 2III
hf
cos2
j1
2

K 2IC






j1
hf
hf
cos2 w 3  4 sin sin
2c  cos hf sin2 w
8
2
2
26

Such an equivalent form can provide a concept of eective SIF for mixed three modes. That is, one can simply
calculate the eective SIF according to Eq. (26), and evaluate the fracture just by comparing it with the toughness. Based on Eq. (25a), the branching fracture angles are shown in Fig. 4 (where j = 1.8). Fig. 5 shows the
fracture surface according to Eq. (26). An important observation from Fig. 4(b) is that the fracture angle decreases as KIII increases, i.e., KIII also has eect on the fracture direction.
4. Experimental examinations
In order to demonstrate the validity of the aforementioned criterion, the failure experiments under the
three-mode mixed loadings have been carried out. We designed a loading xture shown in Fig. 6, and used
the test machine MTS809a/809t, by which the tensile and torsion loadings can be applied simultaneously.
Cylindrical specimens are made of aluminium alloy with the material constants E = 70 GPa and m = 0.35.
To introduce a regular annular crack, the specimens are rst machined to the shape as shown in Fig. 7. Then,
the notch is processed by the YAG laser for 0.3 s with the power 2.0 kW. During the process, the rotate speed
of the specimen is 250 rpm. One of the processed notches is shown in Fig. 8. Finally, the mode I fatigue tests
have been carried out to make fatigue propagation so that the inuence of fused eect can be eliminated. To
the end, the relatively regular initial annular cracks can be introduced as shown in Fig. 9. The practical size
and shape of the pre-crack are determined from the cross-sections after failure experiments for numerical analysis. For the convenience to measure the crack shapes and initial failure points, we marked the specimens on
their sides facing to experimenters in the experiments.

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

1257

80

40

20

e)

15

30

(D 45 60
egree
)

(a)

30
15

75

eg
re

00

90
75
60
45

(D

f (Degree)

60

90 0

80
o

=10
o

=20

60

f (Degree)

=0

=30
o

=40

40
=50

20

=60

=70

=80

(b)

15

30

45

60

75

90

(Degree)

Fig. 4. Fracture angles under various mixed-mode loading conditions: (a) branching angles as a three dimensional surface, (b) branching
angles as two dimensional curves.

Changing the xed angles of the specimens and the loading combination of tension and torsion, we
achieved the purpose of fracture under various mode mixities. The experimental results under various
mixed-mode loading conditions are shown in Table 1, where the inner diameter of fracture face is the average
diameter of the fractured section.
Due to the complexity of the loading conditions, SIFs have been analyzed by ANSYS program. To make it
simple, the tensile and torsion loads applied on the clamp are transferred to the specimens by transforming
into the tensile force, torsion and bending moments, as depicted in Fig. 10. Thus, only the straight parts of
the specimens (without two ends) are required to be analyzed. The FE-meshes of one specimen are shown
in Fig. 11, it is noted that FE-meshes at the crack tip have been modied according to the digital photos
of the cross-sections after the facture.
To predict the fracture loadings, we have to clarify the initial breakpoints. We rst worked out the SIFs
along various paths (that is, at various positions) (angle a) as shown in Fig. 11 by the extrapolation method.
Fig. 12 is the extrapolation example of SIFs for the specimen N at the position of a = 3p/8. It can be seen that
the extrapolation is of good linearity, which demonstrates the reliability of the numerical analysis. With the
numerical results of SIFs, the eective SIFs at various angles have been calculated by Eqs. (25a) and (26),
as shown in Fig. 13(a). The position corresponding to the maximum eective SIF is regarded as the fracture
initiation point. For the specimen N, the predicted fracture initiation point is a = p/2, as indicated in
Fig. 13(b).
The similar analyses have been carried out for all the other specimens, and the results of the maximum eective SIFs are shown in Fig. 14. The result of the specimen A, which is under the pure-mode I condition, can be

1258

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

1.0

0.8

0.4

KIII /KIC

0.6

0.2

K /K
II

0.8
1.0

(a)

0.8

0.6

IC

/K

0.6

0.4

IC

0.2

0.0

0.0
0.2
0.4

1.0

1.0
0.8
o

=0

KII/KIC

0.6
0.4

=40
o

0.2
0.0
0.0

(b)

=80

=60

0.2

o
o

=20

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

KI/KIC

Fig. 5. The fracture surface and curves for three-mode mixities: (a) three dimensional fracture surface, (b) two dimensional fracture
curves.

Fig. 6. The loading xture for mixed-mode experiments.

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

1259

Fig. 7. The geometry of the specimen.

Fig. 8. The initial crack processed by the laser.

Fig. 9. The fatigue-propagated crack.

p
taken as the measured fracture toughness K IC 24:83 MPa m. From Fig. 14, it can be seen that the maximum eective SIFs for specimens under various mode mixities approximately equal to the fracture toughness
KIC. For the specimen
B, which is under the pure-mode III condition, the numerical result
p
p
K III 19:89 MPa m corresponding to fracture, is very close to the toughness K IIIC 20:02 MPa m
obtained from Eq. (18). Therefore, we can draw a conclusion that the general fracture criterion given by
Eqs. (25a), (25b) or (26) matches the fracture experiment results for various mixed-mode loading conditions.

1260

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

Table 1
Experimental results
Test no.

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N

Breaking load
Loading angle h ()

Tensile force (kN)

Torsion moment (Nm)

0
0
0
0
0
0
15
30
45
60
90
30
45
60

24.61
0
20.51
19.75
16.80
16.53
24.83
20.71
10.99
11.95
12.51
10.33
14.58
14.1

0
40.16
11.15
20.44
13.51
22.22
0
0
0
0
0
11.26
15.62
13.16

P
T

Tz=Tcos P

Bending moment
Mx=PLsin

My=Tsin
Mx=PLsin

2L
z

My=Tsin
Torsion moment
Tz=Tcos
Force
Pz=Pcos
Py=Psin

y
x

Fig. 10. The load analysis of the specimen.

Fig. 11. The FE-meshes of the specimen.

Inner diameter (mm)

Modes

8.2
7.42
7.66
7.8
7.2
7.4
8.18
7.94
9.32
6.0
6.44
6.2
7.44
7.4

I
III
I, III
I, III
I, III
I, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

0.1

0.2

0.3

(MPa m1/2)
1/2

KII =4.45 MPa m

0
0.0

0.4

r/a

1/2

0.1

0.2

-15

0.3

-20
0.0

0.4

(c)

r/a

(b)

-10

z( 2r)

(MPa m1/2)

1/2

zz (2r)

10

5
0.0

(a)

KI=18.8 MPa m1/2

rz(2r)

m1/2)
(MPa

15

1/2

20

-5

25

1261

KIII=-11.44 MPa m1/2

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

r/a

Fig. 12. The extrapolation examples of the SIFs for the specimen N: (a) KI, (b) KII, (c) KIII.

Fig. 13. Eective SIFs and the cross-section for the specimen N: (a) eective SIFs, (b) the cross-section.

35

Keff (MPa m1/2)

30
25
20

KIC=24.83 MPa m1/2

15
10
5
0

A B

L M N

Sequence number
Fig. 14. Experimental results of all specimens.

5. Summary and conclusions

A general mixed-mode brittle fracture criterion was proposed based on the concept of MPERR by introducing the approximate expression of Gh. Through the fracture experiments with aluminium alloy specimens
under various mixed-mode loading conditions, the validity of the general fracture criterion is veried. The
main results can be concluded as
(1) Fracture criteria for pure-mode or mixed I/II modes are just the degraded forms of the proposed general
fracture criterion, but the new criterion also contains the prediction of fracture direction even for puremode problems.

1262

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

(2) The relationships among KIC, KIIC and KIIIC have been claried from the viewpoint of energy release
rate.
(3) The SIF KIII also has an eect on the fracture direction for mixed-mode problems containing mode II.
The branch angle decreases with KIII increases.
(4) For mixed I/III modes, the elliptical empirical criterion can be deduced from the general fracture
criterion.
(5) The eective SIF concept has been proposed for arbitrary mixed-mode conditions, by which the fracture
evaluation can be easily carried out.
(6) Mixed-mode fracture tests have been carried out, and the experimental results agree the general fracture
criterion very well.
Acknowledgment
This project is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (10372058).
References
[1] Erdogan F, Sih GC. On the crack extension in plates under plane loading and transverse shear. J Basic Engng 1963;85:51927.
[2] Smith DJ, Ayatollahi MR, Pavier MJ. The role of T-stress in brittle fracture for linear elastic materials under mixed-mode loading.
Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 2001;24(5):13750.
[3] Sih GC. Mechanics of fracture 1: a special theory of crack propagation. Leyden: Noordho International Publishing; 1973.
[4] Sih GC. Strain energy-density factor applied to mixed mode crack problem. Int J Fract 1974;10(3):30521.
[5] Hussain MA, Pu SL, Underwood J. Strain energy release rate for a crack under combined mode I and mode II. In: Paris PC, Irwin
GR, editors. Fracture analysis, ASTM STP 560, Philadelphia, 1974. p. 228.
[6] Palaniswamy K, Knauss WG. On the problem of crack extension in brittle solids under general loading. In: Nemat-Nasser S, editor.
Mechanics today, vol. 4. Pergramon Press; 1978. p. 87148.
[7] Nuismer RJ. An energy release rate criterion for mixed mode fracture. Int J Fract 1975;11(2):24550.
[8] Wu CH. Fracture under combined loads by maximum energy release rate criterion. J Appl Mech 1978;45(3):5538.
[9] Grith AA. The phenomena of rupture and ow in solids. Philos Trans R Soc London 1920;A221:16398.
[10] Gdoutos EE. Fracture mechanics criteria and application. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1990.
[11] Sutton MA, Deng X, Ma F, Newman Jr JC, James M. Development and application of a crack tip opening displacement-based mixed
mode fracture criterion. Int J Solids Struct 2000;37(26):3591618.
[12] Li J, Zhang XB, Recho N. JMp based criteria for bifurcation assessment of a crack in elasticplastic materials under mixed mode
III loading. Engng Fract Mech 2004;71:32943.
[13] Kim YJ, Schwalbe K-H, Ainsworth RA. Simplied J-estimations based on engineering treatment model for homogeneous and
mismatched structures. Engng Fract Mech 2001;68(1):927.
[14] Schwalbe K-H, Zerbst U, Kim Y-J, Brocks W, Cornec A, Heerens J, et al. EFAM ETM 97: the ETM method for assessing the
signicance of crack-like defect in engineering structures. GKSS 98/E/6, GKSS Research Centre, Germany, 1998.
[15] Tian CH. Mixed crack propagation principal stress factor model and I/III mode crack propagation. Chin J Appl Mech 2004;1:849.
[16] Deng X, Sutton MA, Zuo J, Wang L. Mixed-mode fracture analysis of airframe materials. In: Proceedings of the fth joint NASA/
FAA/DoD conference on aging aircraft, Orlando, 2001. p. 110.
[17] Ma F, Deng X, Sutton MA, Newman Jr JC. A CTOD-based mixed-mode fracture criterion. In: Miller KJ, McDowell DL, editors.
Mixed-mode crack behavior, ASTM STP 1359, Philadelphia, 1999. p. 86110.
[18] Sih GC. Mechanics of fracture initiation and propagation. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1991.
[19] Schollmann M, Kullmer G, Fulland M, Richard HA. A new criterion for 3D crack growth under mixed-mode (I + II + III) loading.
In: Freitas MM, editor. Proceedings of the 6th international conference on biaxial/multiaxial fatigue and fracture, Lisboa, 2001. p.
58996.
[20] Schollmann M, Richard HA, Kullmer G, Fulland M. A new criterion for the prediction of crack development in multiaxially loaded
structures. Int J Fract 2002;117(2):12941.
[21] Buchhloz FG, Just V, Richard HA. Computational simulation and experimental ndings of three-dimensional fatigue crack growth
in a single-edge notched specimen under torsion loading. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 2005;28:12734.
[22] Richard HA. Eine Bruchmechanikprobe Zur Bestimmung Von KIIC-werten. Schweiaen Schneiden 1981;33:60612.
[23] Shwalbe K-H, Cornec A. The engineering treatment model and its practical application. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct
1991;14:40512.
[24] Buczek MB, Herakovich CT. A normal stress criterion for crack extension direction in orthotropic materials. J Compos Mater
1985;19:54453.
[25] Saouma V, Ayari ML, Leavell D. Mixed mode crack propagation in homogeneous anisotropic solids. Engng Fract Mech
1987;27:17184.

J. Chang et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 73 (2006) 12491263

1263

[26] Beuth JL, Herakovich CT. Analysis of crack extension in anisotropic materials based on local stress. Theor Appl Fract Mech
1989;11:2746.
[27] Carloni C, Nobile L. Maximum circumferential stress criterion applied to orthotropic materials. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct
2005;28:82533.
[28] Wang Y, Hadeld M. Ring crack propagation in silicon nitride under rolling contact. Wear 2001;250:28292.
[29] Wang Y, Hadeld M. The inuence of ring crack location on the rolling contact fatigue failure of lubricated silicon nitride: fracture
mechanics analysis. Wear 2000;243:16774.
[30] Hwang KC, Hua DH, Yu SW. On the MEER criterion for fracture under combined loading. In: Francois D, editor. Proceedings of
ICF 5, advances research on fracture, Cannes, 1981. p. 12330.