A Review of T-Stress and Its Effects in Fracture Mechanics

Engineering Fracture Mechanics 134 (2015) 218–241
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Engineering Fracture Mechanics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engfracmech
Review
A review of T-stress and its effects in fracture mechanics

M. Gupta a,b,⇑, R.C. Alderliesten b, R. Benedictus b
a
Materials Innovation Institute – M2i, Mekelweg 2, Delft, The Netherlands
b
Structural Integrity and Composites, Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Kluyverweg 1, Delft, The Netherlands
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: An overview of past research on T-stress is presented in this paper. Beginning with the ori-
Received 20 January 2014 gin of T-stress, the authors discuss different phenomena associated with T-stress: crack
Received in revised form 25 August 2014 path stability, isochromatic fringes pattern, plastic zone influence and constraint parame-
Accepted 8 October 2014
ter. Different methodologies—experimental, analytical and finite element methods—used
Available online 18 November 2014
to evaluate T-stress are discussed and studies are categorized under these methods also.
Thereafter, the authors provide a critical review for the role of T-stress in predicting crack
Keywords:
paths stability because it conflicts with the origin of T-stress. Finally, it concludes with a
T-stress
Constraint parameter
concise summary of the research on T-stress.
LEFM Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
2. The origin of T-stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
3. Experimental studies on T-stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
3.1. Photoelastic tests on T-stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
3.1.1. Principle of the photoelastic tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
3.2. Crack paths with T-stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
3.3. Fracture toughness with T-stress: constraint parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
4. Analytical studies to evaluate T-stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
4.1. Weight function technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
4.2. Eigen series expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
4.3. Integral equation technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
4.3.1. Eshelby J-integral method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
4.3.2. Interaction integral in functionally graded, dissimilar and anisotropic materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
4.3.3. Interaction integral in bi-materials and adhesives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
4.3.4. Interaction integral in mixed-mode cracks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
4.4. Method of superposition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
4.5. Perturbation technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
4.6. Dislocation array technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
4.7. Line spring method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
4.8. Stress difference method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
4.9. Other methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
⇑ Corresponding author at: Materials Innovation Institute – M2i, Mekelweg 2, Delft, The Netherlands.
E-mail address: m.gupta@m2i.nl (M. Gupta).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2014.10.013
0013-7944/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Gupta et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 134 (2015) 218–241 219
Nomenclature
B biaxiality parameter
BEM boundary element method
BL boundary layer
CCP center cracked plate
CN centrally notched
CT compact tension
CTOD crack tip opening displacement
DCB double cantilever beam
DEC double edge-cracked
DECP double edged cracked plate
DIC digital image correlation
EEVM eigenfunction expansion variational method
FEM finite element method
FFEM fractal finite element method
FGM functionally graded materials
HCE hybrid crack element
LEFM linear elastic fracture mechanics
KI Mode I stress intensity factor
KII Mode II stress intensity factor
LSY large scale yielding
MBL modified boundary layer
MHS maximum hoop strain
MT middle tension
MTS Maximum Tangential Stress
PMMA polymethyl methacrylate
PZ plastic zone
SCP surface cracked plate
SECP single edged cracked plate
SED strain energy density
SEN single edge notched
SENB single edge notch bend
SERR Strain Energy Release Rate
SIF stress intensity factor
SSY small scale yielding
TDCB tapered double cantilever beam
a/w crack aspect ratio
a/W crack depth to width ratio
fo stress fringe order
hpw actively yielding region normal to the crack plane (mm)
JC fracture toughness
t thickness (mm)
b biaxiality
4.10. T-stress solutions for particular cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228

4.11. Asymmetric semicircular bend specimen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
5. Finite element studies in T-stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
5.1. FEM for T-stress for specimen geometries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
5.2. FEM for T-stress in anisotropic, functionally graded and adhesive materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
5.3. FEM for T-stress for crack tip stress fields and constraint parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
5.4. FEM and plastic zone size. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
5.5. FEM studies for J-integral and T-stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
5.6. Thermal and residual stress effects with T-stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
6. Other studies for T-stress. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
7. The role of T-stress in Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics: a discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
7.1. T-stress: a correction to the Westergaards biaxial stress field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
7.2. The origin of T-stress crack path prediction—a retake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
7.3. Plastic zone and T-stress. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
7.4. Mechanism of crack tip constraint with T-stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
8. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
220 M. Gupta et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 134 (2015) 218–241
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
1. Introduction
A structure’s residual strength under fatigue loading can be increased by crack deflection. Some researchers [1–3] have
previously studied the mechanisms and parameters governing cracks paths leading to various crack path theories, such as
Maximum Tangential Stress (MTS), Strain Energy Density (SED), and Strain Energy Release Rate (SERR). Cotterell [4] pro-
posed the use of a higher-order term—T-stress—to predict crack paths in metals under pure Mode I loading. This became
known as the T-stress theory for predicting crack path stability, and it used the sign of T-stress to predict the stability. Some
researchers [5,6] associated the T-stress sign with the crack path stability predictions overlooking its mathematical origin for
the far-field boundary correction to the stress field in the transverse direction. Other researchers have used T-stress to
explain results for other phenomena [7–10] in fracture mechanics. Hence, it leads to various understandings and interpre-
tations of T-stress. This paper provides an overview of the past studies performed with T-stress.
Sherry [11] reviewed the analytical methods used for evaluating T-stress, while Chen [12] reviewed the integral equation
method for multiple cracks with T-stress. The aim of the current review paper was to present a concise summary of all the
T-stress studies comprising the origin of T-stress, phenomena associated with T-stress, experimental results, methods of
evaluating T-stress, and its application in various fields. The paper finally provides a critical review for the crack path
stability predictions with T-stress sign considering its origin.
The paper begins with an introduction to the origin of T-stress followed by various experimental studies to understand
T-stress in fracture mechanics. The analytical models developed using different mathematical techniques to evaluate T-stress
are mentioned in the ensuing section followed by Finite Element Methods (FEM) that have been developed to increase the
accuracy of the calculated T-stress values and also explain the effect of T-stress at the crack tip. Finally, the results are crit-
ically discussed and the conclusion is presented for T-stress associated phenomena in linear elastic fracture mechanics
(LEFM).
2. The origin of T-stress
The use of the Westergaard equations to understand the stress field in a cracked specimen is one of the oldest and most
popular methods. They have played an important role in the development of LEFM to analyze the stress field in a cracked
specimen. In 1939, Westergaard [13] developed a description of the biaxial stress field for internal cracks in pressurized cyl-
inders. He demonstrated that ‘‘in a restricted but important group of cases the normal stresses and the shearing stress in the
x and y -directions at the crack tip can be stated in the form’’ [14]
8 9 8 9
< rx >
> = KI
> 1 sin 2h sin 3h
h< 2 >=
ry ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi cos 1 þ sin 2h sin 3h
2
ð1Þ
>
: > 2p r 2> >
sxy ; :
sin 2h cos 3h
2
;
The corresponding terms in Eq. (1) are illustrated in Fig. 1. For Mode I cracks, the boundary condition sxy = 0 along the
entire x-axis is automatically satisfied from the above equation. Westergaard equations that were originally developed for
a biaxial stress field were subsequently applied for uniaxial loading. However, they produce a rx component at the boundary
edges along the crack axis for a purely uniaxial load. This is expected as Westergaard’s solution was developed for a biaxial
loading. To eliminate this transverse component, Irwin [15] suggested the use of a transverse component of stress and called
it T-stress.
Fig. 1. Crack tip parameters.


K
I h h 3h
rx ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi cos 1 sin sin r0x ð2Þ
2pr 2 2 2
Including the non-singular stress, r0x (T-stress), explained the observed tilt of the isochromatic fringe loops away from
the normal in the work of Wells and Post [16] also. Later, Williams [17] showed the presence of T-stress at the edge of a
wedged crack through the eigen series expansion of the stress field. Thereafter, T-stress became widely regarded as the stress
acting parallel to the crack tip in the x-direction.
Cotterell and Rice [3] developed analytical solutions for the stress intensity factors (SIFs) at the tip of a slightly curved
crack or kinked two-dimensional cracks. Using the hypothesis ‘‘crack paths propagate in a direction of KII = 0’’ they demon-
strated crack path stability to be predicted by the sign of T-stress, i.e. crack paths are stable for T < 0 and vice versa. Pham
et al. [18] showed this criterion for crack path prediction was universal with respect to all loading and geometrical situations
for small crack growth. Later, there have been many other studies in the past 50 years on T-stress through experimental, ana-
lytical and FEM which relate T-stress with other phenomena. The following section discusses the various experimental stud-
ies for T-stress and its associated mechanisms.
3. Experimental studies on T-stress
3.1. Photoelastic tests on T-stress
3.1.1. Principle of the photoelastic tests

The isochromatic fringes observed in the photoelastic tests relate to the geometric locus of material points that present
the same principal stress differences. The stress-optic law relates the principal stress differences rI rII with the measured
isochromatic fringe order N, according to Eq. (3):
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
N
rI rII ¼ ððrx ry Þ2 þ 4s2xy Þ ¼ f r ð3Þ
t
where ‘t’ is the thickness of the specimen at the point under analysis and fr is the stress fringe value that depends on the
photoelastic material and the wavelength of the light used in the observation. Since rI rII, is continuous, N varies in a con-
tinuous manner. The locus of points at which N = 0 forms a light band: the locus of points at which N = 1/2 forms an adjacent
dark band; another light band is formed by rays traversing the photoelastic material at points where N = 1; and successive
dark and light bands are formed for increasing values of N. These bands are called fringes. The change from dark fringe to an
adjacent light fringe represents an increase or decrease of 1/2 in the value of N; to assign any other magnitude would violate
the principle of continuity. The number of these fringes increases in proportion to the external forces. Thus, the isochromatic
pattern can be used to obtain the magnitude of rI rII throughout the specimen (see Fig. 2).
Using photoelastic tests, Ramesh et al. [20] studied the equivalence of the multi-parameter equations proposed by
Westergaard [13], Sanford [21], and Atluri and Kobayashi [22] to calculate the crack-tip stress state. They proposed an
over-deterministic least squares technique to evaluate the mixed-mode stress field parameters by photoelasticity. While,
Christopher et al. [23] performed a quantitative evaluation of fatigue crack shielding forces using photoeleasticity and
Fig. 2. Photoelastic fringes without T-stress (a) and the photoelastic fringes with the T-stress and forward tilted fringes (b). 0, 1 and 2 in (a) indicate the
photoelastic fringe order. [19].
Fig. 3. Sanford’s [21] experimental results.
evaluated the interfacial shear stress intensity and retardation intensity at the crack tip, both of which possibly cause the
shielding effects. This was similar to the results obtained by Jian-Jun and Yi-Heng [24] in their study of T-stress effect
(T-effect) for the interaction problem of an interface macrocrack with a near-tip microvoid in the process zone of the main
crack tip with the pseudo traction edge dislocation’ (PTED) method. Positive T-stress has an amplification effect and negative
T-stress has a shielding effect also shown in the studies [25] and FEM results of Spaniel et al. [26] who also showed that Paris
relation is not applicable for cases with different T-stress, and under small scale yielding (SSY) the crack direction prediction
based on both original MTS and with T-stress is sufficiently accurate.
Cotterell [4] studied an isochromatic pattern in a compact tension (CT) specimen similar to the one obtained by Guernsey
and Gilman [27] in a cleavage specimen to show the influence of higher order terms on the stress field ahead of the crack tip.
The crack deviated away from the expected straight path under assumed purely Mode I opening. Cotterell [4] found a cor-
relation between the crack path’s direction and the sign of the first non-singular term, T-stress, (referred to as a2 by Cotterell
in [4]), and between the isochromatic fringes and the sign of T-stress. When T-stress was positive, he observed that the crack
deviated and then the isochromatic fringe pattern tilted backward. This effect of the T-stress on the rotation of the isochro-
matic fringes was also shown by Ayatollahi and Safari [28,29].
Zakeri et al. [30,31] found that the KII and T-stress calculated from the photoelastic methods correlated well with the
numerical values obtained through FEM. Zanganeh et al. [32] used thermoelastic stress analysis and FEM to determine
T-stress and mixed-mode SIFs using pure mode I, mixed-mode I and II, and interacting cracks as case studies. They obtained
a more accurate solution of T-stress using three terms of William’s stress field formulation compared to using only the first
two terms of the expansion. Their studies highlight the correction in the stress field that is obtained by using T-stress which
is expected as the higher order terms increase the accuracy of a stress field.
In contradiction to the Cotterell’s [4] theory for the crack path stability with the T-stress sign, Sanford [21] observed the
crack path to be stable in the vicinity of the specimen edge in CT specimen even though T-stress was positive. Although
Sanford used the Modified Boundary Layer (MBL) to explain the photoelastic the observed crack path was in disagreement
with the T-stress theory. Besides, Sanford [21] observed photoelastic results in which the fringes tilted forward with positive
T-stress, as shown in Fig. 3 which was similar to Ramesh et al. [20]. Sanford [21] observed the photoelastic pattern closer to
the specimen edges thus highlighting the role of T-stress at the boundary edges similar to the FEM results of Shahani and
Tabatabaei [33]. This is further discussed in Section 7.
3.2. Crack paths with T-stress
Several studies [6,9,10,34–41] have evaluated crack paths in materials using the T-stress theory. Llopart et al. [38] studied
crack turning behavior using the T-stress theory in integral structures. Their results showed higher potential for crack
turning in a region far away from the stringers where the parameters—KI, T-stress—are less sensitive to the stringer design.
Matvienko [39] predicted fracture angles using T-stress, and found consistent predictions with the experimental data for
mixed-mode I/II crack growth behavior of Guiting limestone.
Ki [40] studied various criteria for kinking outwards of interface cracks between dissimilar materials with experiments
performed on Brazil-nut-sandwich geometry specimens. He concluded that the slightly modified MTS to accommodate
the T-stress effect could be used for the kink initiation point under assumption of tough interface but that it cannot be used
to determine whether or not to kink.
Williams and Ewing [9] observed that the crack in an angled crack problem extended initially in a stable crack path with
positive T-stress which is in contradiction with what is expected from the T-stress crack path theory. This was also observed
by Finnie and Streit [42] in their photoelastic tests. They suggested the application of the T-stress at a critical distance ahead
of the crack tip which was mathematically justified by Finnie and Saith [10] to be a function of the fracture toughness of a
material. Williams and Ewing [9] used the a, (a = 2c/a, where ‘‘c’’ is an empirically determined distance ahead of the crack tip,
and a is the crack length) in their angled crack problem to predict crack paths. They included the T-stress in MTS and SED
theories for predicting crack paths, and found improved correlation between the experimental results and prediction values.
Leevers et al. [35–37] studied the effect of T-stress on fatigue cracks of various specimen geometries implicitly by defining
a biaxial parameter B. They reported an increasing curvature of crack paths with increasing biaxiality, defined with B is
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
T pa
B¼ ð4Þ
KI
where T = px py, px = load in x-direction, py = load in y-direction. However, Leevers et al. [35–37] observed that T-stress pre-
dicted the crack path for pure Mode I opening differently in Double Cantilever Beam (DCB) and Compact Tension (CT) spec-
imens compared to the other specimens. They found more negative B values (negative T-stress) in longer cracks. For shorter
cracks (crack length to width ratio (a/w) < 0.4), B values were significantly different in the externally notched specimens
such as Single Edge Notched (SEN), single edge notched bend (SENB), CT, double cantilever beam (DCB), and tapered double
cantilever beam (TDCB) compared to larger cracks (0.4 < a/w < 0.7). They concluded that the longer cracks had more negative
T-stress values because no constraint on bending was allowed.
In their CT specimens, they noticed negligible change in KI for different loadings (0.4 < a/w < 0.7), although the B values
were significantly different for shorter cracks (a/w < 0.4). Leevers et al. [35–37] reasoned that T-stress and B were affected by
the bending stresses in the specimens. In another experimental study on the fracture toughness of a material with T-stress,
Joyce [43] found that T-stress had no effect on KIc for CT and three point bend specimens for the a/w range 0.45–0.7. After
comparing the T-stress results from the specimens’ tests, he recommended them to be tested at a/w = 0.7 because at this
value, T-stress was equal for the two geometries.
Hallback and Nilsson [41] investigated mixed-mode fracture in aluminum 7075-T6 with experimental and numerical
studies. Experiments performed exhibited only small differences in the mode mixity values for which a shift in the initial
crack growth appearance occurred. Thus, they concluded T-stress only had a minor influence on the crack transition angle.
The role of T-stress in dynamic fracture resistance has been studied in [44–52]. These studies on dynamic fracture found
T-stress theory for predicting crack paths in dynamic fracture inapplicable. A summary of these experimental studies high-
lights the different observations by different researchers for the crack path stability prediction with the T-stress. These
results raise concerns for the inconsistent predictions with this crack path theory. The authors address the cause for this
inconsistency of T-stress crack path stability theory in Section 7.
3.3. Fracture toughness with T-stress: constraint parameter
The plastic strains in the vicinity of the crack-tip are restrained which results in a triaxial stress state at the crack tip. This
effect is called crack tip constraint and it affects the fracture toughness of a material. This subsection discusses studies that
investigated the role of T-stress at crack tips with regard to its influence on the crack tip constraint parameter.
The papers [30,31,39,53–85] present other works of Ayatollahi et al. who have extensively explored the role of T-stress in
LEFM through combined experimental, numerical and analytical work. Their modification of the MTS criterion by the inclu-
sion of T-stress and in some cases other higher order terms improved the correlation with the experimental results in com-
parison with conventional MTS in a variety of problems ranging from graphite rocks and soda lime glass to double cleavage
drilled specimens (DCDC). Smith et al. [6] showed substantial influence of T-stress for mode II tests using a shear specimen
under tension and compression to obtain positive and negative T-stress values respectively. They showed an inverse rela-
tionship between T-stress and fracture toughness implying that negative T-stress increases mode II fracture toughness.
The following studies [47,86–93] undertook experiments to study the influence of T-stress on fracture toughness of var-
ious materials. These studies demonstrated that the apparent fracture toughness of the material varied with specimen geom-
etry or the constraint level, and nonsingular T-stress term needs to be accounted for to accurately measure the fracture
resistance in FGM. Sumpter and Hancock [94] observed a significant Jc increase in crack tip opening displacement (CTOD)
bend specimens when a/W is reduced below 0.3. The increase in toughness was attributed to loss of constraint (negative
T-stress or reduced constraint at crack tip) due to break back of the PZ at shallow crack depths.
Some other studies [95–100] investigated the crack tip constraint with different parameters—T-stress, Q-parameter, and
the multiaxiality quotient, q. The J–T (J-integral with T-stress) analysis results based on an MBL solution showed that as the
applied load increased, the solutions departed from the MBL solutions. These studies demonstrated that loss of constraint
due to increasing plastic deformations is not captured well by the elastic T-stress, and between deep cracks and shallow
cracks.
The relation between T-stress, constraint and master curve transition temperature was investigated in [98,101,102]
Wallin [102] developed and verified the relation between T-stress and the master curve transition temperature. His two-
parameter (K-T-stress) model predicted constraint loss similar to more detailed models based on Weibull analysis.
In [41,103] Hallback et al. performed experiments on mixed-mode loading configurations. With the inclusion of T-stress,
their prediction was in good agreement with experiments. However, in [41], they did an evaluation without T-stress and
their results in [41] showed a shift between mode I and mode II type crack growth initiation that was fairly well predicted
without the T-stress. They concluded that the inclusion of T-stress does not improve the understanding of the observed
geometry and size dependence on fracture toughness. Wang and Xu [104] concluded that high SIFs of the incident cracks
easily induce interfacial debonding initiation, and changing the T-stress sign is an effective way to control interfacial deb-
onding initiation (negative T-stress suppresses interfacial debonding initiation).
In general, the studies mentioned that T-stress captured loss of constraint well at low loads, but at higher loads or deep
cracks the correlation was not sufficient. The mismatch at the higher loads or deeper cracks can be attributed to the plastic
flow under large scale yielding (LSY) that relieves the stresses at the crack tip and drops them below the MBL solution.
4. Analytical studies to evaluate T-stress
Sherry et al. [11] summarized the analytical methods used for evaluating T-stress by various analytical methods—the
weight function technique, the stress distribution method, the variational method, the Eshelby J-integral method, the inter-
action integral method, and the line spring method. They concluded that T-stress affects the hydrostatic stress which in turn
affects the plastic constraint in the crack tip vicinity. Furthermore, they warned that T-stress is a constraint indexing param-
eter which depends on the size of a structure as well as its shape. The remaining part of this section summarizes the research
which has evaluated T-stress for various crack configurations categorizing it under the method used.
4.1. Weight function technique
The concept of weight function, or alternatively Green’s function was introduced by Bueckner [105] based on analytical
function representation of elastic fields for isotropic materials. He showed that the SIF due to an arbitrary set of applied loads
can be obtained by integrating over crack length a product of the loads with the weight function. The integral expressions
read as follows for KI and T-stress:
Z a
pffiffiffiffi
KI ¼ w hðx; aÞry ðxÞdx ð5Þ
0
Z a
pffiffiffiffi
T¼ w tðx; aÞry ðxÞdx ð6Þ
0
where a and x are the non-dimensional crack length and coordinate, respectively, defined by a = a/w, and x = x/w. Stress con-
tributions are weighted by a weight function (h, t) dependent on the location x where the ry acts.
In [106–125] Fett with other researchers produced T-stress solutions for a series of problems such as edge-cracked rect-
angular plate, rectangular plates and circular disks, internally cracked circular disks, etc. They made use of weight functions,
and the boundary collocation technique for a series of problems such as edge-cracked rectangular plate and similar specimen
configurations. The calculated T-stresses’ signs were in agreement with the crack path stability of the Cotterell and Rice [3]
theory for small cracks.
The weight function technique was also used to calculate the higher order terms along with the T-stress for an edge crack
in a finite plate [126], and for cracked specimens [127–129] using the variational principle. Sham’s FEM [129] utilized the
traction and displacement boundaries, and permitted the Bueckner-Rice weight functions and second order weight functions
for the elastic T-stress term to be determined in one single run.
The weight function technique for evaluating T-stress is easy to implement, and provides sufficiently accurate solutions
with relative ease. Several researchers demonstrated the ease of use of weight function technique in extracting T-stress for
various cases such as thick-walled cylinders using Boundary Element Model (BEM) [130], mode I loading [131], circumfer-
ential cracks in cylinders [132], fracture cases [133], in a semi-infinite plane crack [134] and at a mixed-mode crack by the
second order weight functions similar to the Bueckner-Rice weight function [135] using the unified finite element method
[127]. Cui et al. [134] presented Green’s functions for T-stress in a semi-infinite plane crack and explained the experimental
results of Westram et al. [136] by proposing a large scale switching model. However, the correlation between the experi-
ments and prediction of crack path stability was not sufficient.
4.2. Eigen series expansion
Several studies developed the stress field at the crack tip by calculating higher order coefficient terms besides the T-stress
with the eigen series expansion method. These studies include (i) expansion based on the Westergaard’s stress function—
[137] in which the stress field for FGMs up to the sixth order was evaluated, [138] where the closed expression for a finite
crack in an infinite plane medium with mode I and mode II remote load was developed, (ii) Nazarali and Wang [139] incor-
porated the crack-tip stress field into the Von Mises yield criteria and showed the effect of T-stress on the PZ variations com-
pared with the results of the work of Larsson and Carlsson [7], (iii) Zappalorto and Lazzarin [140,141] dealt with high order
elastic singular terms at cracks and re-entrant corners (sharp V-notches), which are commonly omitted in linear elastic anal-
yses by the argument that the strain energy and displacements in the near-tip region should be bounded, (iv) Chen [142]
studied the stress analysis for an infinite strip weakened by periodic cracks where the cracks were assumed in a horizontal
position, and (v) Leguillon [143] used the energy criterion to apply the T-stress theory for crack path stability in anisotropic
materials.
4.3. Integral equation technique
A very promising approach to an accurate calculation of the near crack tip fields consists in the application of so-called
two-state conservation integrals [144]. They provide an efficient tool for calculating SIFs and T-stress. For a properly intro-
duced auxiliary solution to the M-integral, which is expressed as a sum of path independent J-integrals the unique relation-
ship between the M-integral and T-stress can be found. The success of the M-integral method is crucially linked to the
existence of the auxiliary solutions in the form of the complementary eigenfunction [145].
Chen [12] presented a review consisting of advanced treatment of multiple crack problems in plane elasticity. The fun-
damental for the formulation of several integral equations was highlighted including those initiated by point sources or by a
distributed traction along the crack face. Additionally, the concept of modified complex potential was emphasized. Li and Lee
[146] modeled the crack kinking behavior observed experimentally in [147] by using the maximum hoop strain (MHS) cri-
terion in a piezoelectric material.
Chen and Hasebe [148] showed that T-stress has no direct effect on the other higher order terms of the William’s series
expansion and the J-integral. However, they mentioned it affects the PZ size which affects the J-integral. The studies
[148,149] also showed the influence of T-stress on PZ. The current paper explains this relationship with the concept of energy
balances at the crack tip in Section 7.3).
In three-dimensional crack fronts, Nakamura and Parks [150] showed that deviation from the corresponding two-
dimensional results increases with increasing relative crack length and with decreasing relative plate thickness. Later, Zhao
et al. [151] showed a minimum SIF value present at the mid-plane, where T-stress reaches maximum (and is negative), and
rapid loss of crack-tip constraint was observed near free surfaces as the crack grew deeper.
The following studies [152–162] calculated the higher order terms for the stress field in order to calculate the stresses at
the crack tip more accurately for various cases such as cruciform cracks, interfacial cracks, etc. They deemed the T-stress
alone was insufficient to evaluate the stress field accurately especially in LSY. The necessity to include the higher order terms
with T-stress to correctly estimate the stress field at the crack tips suggests that T-stress is simply a correction parameter to
the stress as initially suggested by Irwin [15].
4.3.1. Eshelby J-integral method

The Eshelby J-integral makes use of properties of the path-independent J-integral. Two elastic finite element analyses are
conducted; the first is of the cracked geometry in question subjected to the type of loading under consideration, the second is
of a semi-infinite crack subjected to symmetrical, point force loading at the crack tip. The latter configuration has an analyt-
ical solution in which the stress distribution is purely radial and inversely proportional to distance from the crack tip. The
second finite element analysis is best accomplished by using the specimen mesh loaded by a point force at the crack tip. All
boundaries apart from the crack flank are subjected to either the analytical distribution of traction or the associated field of
displacement field. J-integrals are calculated for each of these two solutions. Their nodal displacement and element stress
distributions are then added together to give a combined solution. The J-integral of this combined field is also evaluated.
The elastic T-stress for the properly loaded specimen can be obtained from the resulting expression.
The studies [8,163,164] used Eshelby technique to study T-stress effects. Zhou et al. [8,164] developed a closed form
solution under mode I conditions and mode II conditions. Inclusion of material hardening behavior and T-stress gave them
better approximations of the PZ in comparison with the finite element studies. Their results indicated that the T-stress has a
shielding or anti-shielding effect on the interaction between crack and inclusion, which is strongly dependent on the value of
T-stress and the location of the inclusion similar to [24].
4.3.2. Interaction integral in functionally graded, dissimilar and anisotropic materials

Several researchers [165–175] applied the interaction integral to study T-stress in FGMs. The interaction integral method
[174] is based on conservation laws of elasticity and fracture mechanics concepts. It makes use of a conservation integral for
two admissible states of an elastic solid: actual and auxiliary states. Shah et al. [173] demonstrated T-stress to be signifi-
cantly affected by the material anisotropy by applying and verifying their developed M-integral to the problems of cen-
ter-cracked plate (CCP), single-edged cracked plate (SECP), and double edged cracked plate (DECP). These studies showed
that material anisotropy affects the T-stress.
Sladek et al. [176–181] evaluated T-stress using M-integral for thermoelastic stresses, elastodynamic stresses and the
interfaces between dissimilar materials using BEM. They showed the leading-order term dominance in the asymptotic
expansion of stresses at crack-tip vicinity is limited for elastoplastic behaving structures under a thermal load.
In [182–186] Yuan and Yang studied T-stress in anisotropic materials for the following cases—crack tip field expansion in
an anisotropic linear elastic solid utilizing conservation laws of elasticity and Bettis reciprocal theorem under a concentrated
force and moment acting at the crack tip [182], crack kinking out of the crack plane in a generally anisotropic elastic body
under two-dimensional formation [183], and developed the asymptotic crack-tip fields, including the effect of transverse
shear deformation in an anisotropic plate under bending and twisting moments and transverse shear load [185,186].
4.3.3. Interaction integral in bi-materials and adhesives

The studies [187–195] used interaction integral to study T-stress in bi-materials and adhesives. Profant et al. [187] used
the dislocation array technique to calculate the T-stress in bi-materials. First they calculated the M-integral from the far-field
deformation combined with an auxiliary solution. Thereafter the near-tip information is extracted directly from the far-field
deformation to calculate T-stress and SIFs. Their model provided a basis for an application of the fracture criterion at an inter-
face between anisotropic materials when competition—deflection or penetration—at the interface has to be analyzed. Later,
Chen et al. [196] found that the SIF is smaller than in a homogeneous material when the crack is in the weaker material, and
decreases when the distance between crack tip and interface decreases.
Sevecek et al. [188] considered a crack perpendicularly impinging the bimaterial interface and a crack arbitrary inclined
to the interface for a wide range of elastically mismatched materials. Crack penetration was favored rather than crack deflec-
tion in spite of the fact that the T-stress takes positive values which is not expected from the T-stress crack paths stability.
Fleck et al. [193] investigated the problem of crack path selection in a brittle adhesive layer. Their analysis provided the
location of the crack as a function of the combination of applied SIFs and the mismatch in elastic moduli between the adhe-
sive layer and the adjoining material. Crack path stability depended on the residual stress, far-field T-stress and the elastic
moduli mismatch and not T-stress alone. Considering the results in [188,193] it can be concluded that T-stress alone cannot
predict crack paths in bi-materials and adhesives.
4.3.4. Interaction integral in mixed-mode cracks

Karihaloo et al. [197] considered an asymmetrically kinked, semi-infinite crack in a two-dimensional solid under mixed-
mode loading and T-stress to develop a closed form solution for the SIFs and T-stress. They used the integral equation tech-
nique based on Green’s function and Muskhlishvili’s complex potentials to develop the closed form solutions. Using the
locally maximum energy release rate criterion for branching of a crack, they showed that the T-stress theory for crack path
stability holds true qualitatively.
4.4. Method of superposition
The method of superposition was used by the following studies [198–204] to investigate the T-stress role in various cases
such as out-of-plane crack tip constraint and internal mixed-mode cracks. Meshii et al. [199,200] presented the T-stress solu-
tion for semi-elliptical axial surface cracks in a cylinder subjected to mode-I uniform stress on the crack surface and provided
concrete formulation of the superposition principle for the T33-stress: the elastic parameter that describes the out-of-plane
crack tip constraint effect. Chen [203,204] developed T-stress solutions for multiple crack problems by decomposing the ori-
ginal problem into a uniform stress field, and many single crack problems for complex problems such as a circular arc and a
cusp crack problem. He suggested to modify a particular K value as KIT when T-stress is equal to zero and the crack grows in
an uncontrollable manner.
The following studies [205–209] investigated the T-stress effect in microcrack shielding. Zhao and Chen [205,206] studied
the T-stress effect in microcrack shielding by solving the interaction problem of a macrocrack with near tip microcracks
applying a discrete model. They found T-stress had no effect on the results for the parallel microcrack cases; however, it
played an important role for oriented microcrack cases. The effect of T-stress on microcrack shielding or amplification sub-
stantially depended on the sign and magnitude of T-stress and the geometry of the microcrack arrangement.
4.5. Perturbation technique
Perturbation theory comprises mathematical methods that are used to find an approximate solution to a problem which
cannot be solved exactly, by starting from the exact solution of a related problem. It develops an expression for the desired
solution in terms of a formal power series in some ‘‘small’’ parameter—the perturbation series—that quantifies the deviation
from the exactly solvable problem. The leading term in this power series is the solution of the exactly solvable problem,
while further terms describe the deviation in the solution, due to the deviation from the initial problem. An approximate
solution is obtained by truncating the series, usually by keeping only the first two terms, the initial solution and the
‘‘first-order’’ perturbation correction. The perturbation technique relies on the elastic reciprocity and on direct solution of
elastic crack problems.
Pettit et al. [210] extended the perturbation model of Cotterell and Rice [3] to incorporate the effects of process zone size
which was represented by cohesive tractions on the crack flanks trailing the crack tip. Their increased process zone size
showed an increase in the perturbation sensitivity of a crack in a positive T-stress environment, causing more rapid turning
of the crack than was experimentally observed. Sumi et al. [211] extended the crack path stability theory of Cotterell and
Rice [3] by including the effect of the change of the stability with increasing crack length along the curved trajectory.
In [212] Xu and Keer investigated the problem of dynamic crack curving in a brittle solid. Their stability analysis for the
slightly curved deviation of a running crack under mixed-mode loading found the straight running crack path to be stable for
T < 0, and unstable when T > 0. This is in contradiction to the experimental results for dynamics cracks [47–49]. Later, Xu and
Keer [213] did the stress analysis for slightly curved cracks in anisotropic homogeneous solids using a perturbation tech-
nique with Muskhelishvili approach. Their results showed crack path stability as affected by the T-stress exhibits different
qualitative behavior compared with crack growth in isotropic materials.
Similar to Williams and Ewing [9], Li et al. [214] presented a solution for the elastic T-stress at the tip of a slightly curved
or kinked crack. With a positive T-stress and non-zero mode I and mode II SIFs initially accompanying the crack, T-stress did
not become positive with the increasing crack length but the crack continued to curve. The absence of positive T-stress with
the instable crack is in disagreement with the crack path stability theory.
Gao and Chiu [215] investigated the influence of anistropy and various fracture criteria for a number of problems—
circular arc, slightly jogged or kinked crack, cosine wave cracks— and they concluded that the K-based criterion including
T-stress behaves differently for predicting the crack branching behaviors. Extending their analysis to Cotterell and Rice
[3] for stability of a symmetric crack path in anisotropic cases they found the original approach of Cotterell and Rice [3]
to be inapplicable.
Alfalo et al. [216] considered a three-dimensional semi-infinite planar crack growing under type I singular loading. Some
of their results showed that positive Tx (T-stress component in x-direction) without Tz (T-stress component in z-direction)
made the crack path more stable in contrast to the theory for two-dimensional cracks. They reasoned that in the absence
of T-stress, the perturbed geometry of the crack gives rise to KII which deviates the crack back to the plane of reference of
the unperturbed crack. The presence of a positive Tx gives rise to a mode II stress intensity factor that couples with the
x-derivative of the perturbation, and acts to increase the magnitude of this derivative. If this increase is small, then the
net effect of the T-stress is to enhance the decay rate of the perturbation.
The majority of the studies mentioned in this subsection found T-stress theory for predicting the crack paths in
anisotropic materials, dynamic cracks and particular cases such as edge cracks and wedging of a strip to be inapplicable.
4.6. Dislocation array technique
The mathematics for dislocation arrays was established in [217] for physical dislocations, i.e. with discrete Burgers vec-
tors and discrete positions, rather than the mathematical concept of dislocations with continuous Burgers vectors in contin-
uous arrays. This has been used for efficient determination of SIFs by modeling cracks as arrays of dislocations [218] and
extended in the following studies to evaluate T-stress.
The studies [219–226] employed the dislocation array technique to compute T-stress in various problems. These prob-
lems vary from such branched crack model [219], crack perpendicular to a bimaterial surface [220,221], and straight and
symmetric cracks [225]. Zhu and Yang’s [226] prediction, which modeled the problem with dislocations showed the crack
kinking to increase with positive T-stress in accordance with the T-stress theory.
4.7. Line spring method
In the line spring method, a distribution of spring elements is introduced along the surface length of the crack in order to
model the cracked compliance correctly. Wang and Parks [227] used the line-spring method to calculate the SIFs and T-stress
along the crack front in surface cracked plates. Realizing the surface cracked problem to be essentially three-dimensional in
nature, they did not use the conventional two-dimensional computation methods of Larsson and Carlsson [7] and Betegon
and Hancock [228]. Their results showed their solutions to be more accurate for evaluating T-stress up to moderate yielding
loads.
Berg et al. [229] and Jayadevan et al. [230,231] used the line-spring method to investigate the constraint corrected resis-
tance curves for circumferential cracks and investigate ductile tearing in surface cracked pipes respectively. Berg et al. [229]
found the T-stress curves worked well as a constraint even under large-scale yielding (LSY).
4.8. Stress difference method
Yang [232] proposed the stress difference method to compute T-stress at crack tip. It incorporated the iterative single-
domain dual-boundary element method and a tip-node rule to impose zero displacement jump at the crack tip. The differ-
ence between r11 and r22 was demonstrated to evaluate T-stress.
4.9. Other methods
Cheng et al. [233] developed a novel method combining the BEM and the singularity characteristic analysis to evaluate
the complete stress field at a crack tip region. A modified Paris relation was introduced to predict the crack propagation
under the mixed-mode loading, in order to explore the influence of the non-singular stress on fatigue life. Comparison with
experimental results showed that the fatigue life prediction was more accurate with the inclusion of non-singular stresses
[234]. This is expected because accuracy of the calculated stress increases with inclusion of the higher order stress terms.
Guo [235] developed a three-dimensional strip yield model to rationalize the effects of out-of-plane and in-plane con-
straints. He showed the T-stress influence on in-plane constraint to be considerable only if the PZ size becomes comparable
to the crack length. Hallstrom and Gerenstedt [236] showed that consideration of T-stress improves the accuracy of crack
path prediction in dominant mode II fields under mixed mode fracture of cracks and wedge shaped notches in expanded PVC
foam.
Broberg [237] used a cell model and concluded that the ratio between the cohesive strength and the yield strength is
important parameter for describing the competition between decohesion and plastic flow in a crack edge vicinity. He also
mentioned that T-stress plays a part by influencing the ratio of macroscopic stress to yield stress which defines the devel-
opment of a process zone.
4.10. T-stress solutions for particular cases
A number of studies have sought T-stress solutions for particular cases. They will be briefly mentioned in this section.
T-stress solutions in multiple cracks and interaction of cracks were studied in [12,205–208,238]. Kirilyuk and Levchuk
[239,240], as well as Zhao et al. [241–243] studied flat and semi-elliptical cracks. Solutions have been presented for curved,
arc, and circular arc cracks [244–251], as well as for branch and line cracks [252–255]. Zhong and Li [256] studied T-stress
effects for cracks in magnetoelectroelastic solid.
Li et al. [257] studied crack extension resulting from a closed crack in compression. The crack-tip field of such a crack
contains a singular field relative to KII and non-singular T-stresses Tx and Ty parallel and perpendicular to the crack plane.
A compressive Ty increases the kinking angle and reinforces apparent mode-II fracture toughness, while a compressive Tx
decreases the kinking angle and enhances apparent mode-II fracture toughness.
4.11. Asymmetric semicircular bend specimen
Darban et al. [258] presented a new asymmetric semicircular bend specimen (ASCB). the ASCB specimen can always pro-
vide a wide range of negative T-stresses which cannot be achieved from SCB specimen and was highly recommended for
experimental investigations.
5. Finite element studies in T-stress
Larsson and Carlsson [7] computed T-stress as the average difference between the rx for a specimen and the correspond-
ing value obtained from the Boundary Layer (BL) approach where rx was obtained from the elastic–plastic finite element
method. In the elastic–plastic solution, they observed the plastic region to grow linearly with K2I and the elastic region to
grow linearly with KI. They showed different plastic strains at the crack tip for different specimen geometries by the MBL
method. For CN and Double edge-cracked (DEC) configurations, MBL computed more plastic strain elements compared to
the BL method. Conversely, for CT and bending specimens the number of plastic strain elements compared was lower, com-
pared to the value of the first plastically-yielding element. Furthermore, MBL calculated larger PZ sizes at the crack tip com-
pared to BL. Larsson and Carlsson [7] also showed an increasing PZ in the internally notched specimen with the MBL
approach and a reduced PZ in externally notched specimens (Bend specimen and CT) similar to Leevers et al. [35–37]. These
results provide evidence for an effect of T-stress on the PZ size but do not provide the mechanism of this effect.
Rice [259] explained Larsson and Carlsson’s [7] results of limited range of validity by SSY, whereby small crack tip PZ is
correlated in terms of the SIFs. He explained their results by considering T-stress in a plane strain yielding model. Rice
claimed T-stress has less effect on crack tip parameters such as crack opening displacement (COD) and J-integral compared
to the yield zone size. Inclusion of T-stress as a second crack tip parameter characterizes the small plane strain yield zone
more adequately when KI alone becomes inadequate.
Ayatollahi et al. [260] explored the direct use of FEM for calculating T-stress. T-stress was determined for a test config-
uration designed to investigate brittle and ductile fracture in mixed mode loading. T-stress was calculated in mode I by direct
use of displacement along the crack flanks. Their results for the mixed-mode specimen under real loading conditions showed
the biaxiality ratio, in mode II is much higher than in mode I conditions.
5.1. FEM for T-stress for specimen geometries
The following studies [261–264] employed FEM to investigate T-stress role in various cases—SECP, DECP and CCP spec-
imens [261], SIFs and T-stress for edge cracks aligned along the gradient in finite size elastically graded plates [263]. Other
studies pertaining to the crack paths stability with T-stress are discussed below.
Chen et al. [265] and Petit et al. [264], showed the necessity and influence of T-stress in predicting crack paths correctly
for aircraft fuselages. Similarly, Becker Jr. et al. [266] incorporated T-stress to predict crack paths correctly when the SERR
criterion failed to accurately predict the kink direction.
Al-Ani and Hancock [267] studied the J-dominance of short cracks in tension and bending. Edge-cracked bars with an a/W
ratio less than 0.3 in bending and 0.5 in tension lose J-dominance. This loss was attributed to compressive T-stress. Geom-
etries which exhibited tensile T-stress retained J-dominance in agreement with MBL formulations. This was similar to the
experimental results reported in [94] and re-establishes the influence of T-stress on crack tip constraint.
Leguillon and Murer [268] observed no crack kinking or branching in Double Cantilever Beam (DCB) and CT configura-
tions even for positive T-stress until a threshold was reached. They used both the energetic and the stress fracture criteria
[219] to define a positive T-stress threshold below which no branching can occur in a biaxial stress field. They concluded that
no kinking can occur below the aforementioned critical/threshold T-stress value provided the size of the inhomogeneities is
much smaller than the characteristic length. Later, Selvarathinam and Goree [219] explained if a crack slightly kinks due to
micro-inhomogeneities with T-stress below threshold T-stress, it will instantaneously realign itself along with the primary
crack.
Zafosnik et al. [269,270] investigated a gear tooth root. Formulation of modified SED and MTS criteria was based on the
asymptotic stress field that comprises the stress intensity factors KI, KII, the T-stress, tractions on crack surfaces caused by
pressure trapped inside the crack and the critical distance rc. The results for the influence of stress distribution around
the crack tip showed that T-stress can be neglected for crack propagation in the tooth’s root. The crack propagation path
could be modeled accurately when only stresses described with SIFs were considered.
Jayadevan et al. [50,271] studied T-stress evolution in dynamically loaded fracture specimens by performing two-
dimensional plane strain, elastodynamic finite element analyses of SEN specimens. Their results demonstrated that
dynamically loaded specimens are subjected to larger negative T-stresses in the early stages of loading as compared to static
loading, and that the crack opening profile and opening stress at a finite distance from the tip are strongly affected by the
magnitude and sign of the T-stress at any given crack speed.
This subsection again highlights the contradiction and unreliability in predicting crack path stability with T-stress.
However, the results mentioned in this subsection verify the influence of T-stress on the constraint parameter.
5.2. FEM for T-stress in anisotropic, functionally graded and adhesive materials
The following studies[272–276] investigated T-stress role in anisotropic materials, FGMs and adhesive materials. Zhang
[277] calculated the effect of T-stress for the spot welds to improve the results in [278]. The obtained SIFs closely matched
with the results from [279].
Lugo and Daniewicz [280] showed the crack closure transient behavior is different for positive and negative T-stresses.
While positive T-stress shows a typically monotonic plane stress behavior, negative T-stress displays an initial increase till
a peak and decreases subsequently. Lee and Kim [281] showed the plastic mismatch as well as compressive T-stress in
bi-materials to affect the interfacial crack-tip constraint substantially through FEA similar to the findings in the analytical
studies of [282] where elastic mismatch was found to influence the T-stress in anisotropic materials.
Through FEA and numerical analysis Chen and Dillard [283–286] analyzed the crack paths in adhesively bonded joints.
They found that T-stress significantly influenced the crack paths in such joints, and similar to homogeneous materials crack
paths were unstable for positive T-stress and stable for negative T-stress. This was consistent with the predictions made by
Fleck, Hutchison and Suo in [287] and with the T-stress crack path stability theory. Chen et al. [286] also, reported that
T-stress is closely related to adhesive layer thickness.
5.3. FEM for T-stress for crack tip stress fields and constraint parameter
The following studies [228,288–299] investigated the crack tip constraint parameter and stress field with FEM. A few
studies [300–302] studied the void coalescence and growth with T-stress. Betegon et al. [302] used Gurson’s model for
FEA to explain ductile crack growth in SENB fracture mechanics using void growth micromechanisms. They observed the
opening stresses and triaxiality in the process zone of short crack specimens were lower computed using SSY. Different crack
tip constraints resulted in divergent deformation states even at the first extension of crack initiation. They suggested T-stress
to parameterize these changes in stress and strain fields which modify void nucleation and growth occurring at the crack tip,
and justify the greater toughness under bending stresses for the specimens with shorter cracks.
Betegon and Hancock [228], Du and Hancock [288], and O’Dowd and Shih [289] also studied the T-stress effects on crack-
tip triaxiality. They showed that in a highly constrained state, corresponding to positive T-stress, tensile stresses are high and
extend over a large region in front of the crack tip. This results in a lower PZ size at the crack tip because of the stress redis-
tribution in a larger zone. As the constraint is relaxed for increasing negative T-stress, the tensile stresses ahead of the crack
tip gradually fall, making the PZ at the crack tip larger. Betegon and Hancock [228] concluded that, under two-dimensional
plane strain, positive T-stress signifies the attainment of single-parameter characterization for representing the stress fields,
while negative T-stress shows that a one-parameter description is generally not sufficient to represent actual stress fields.
This is because negative T-stresses reduce the constraint within the PZ at the crack tip such that plasticity does not com-
pletely envelop the tip. Hence, the stress field requires the two-parameter characterization or the MBL solution.
Roychowdhury et al. [294,303] investigated the effects of T-stress on fatigue crack pffiffifficlosure under SSY. Their results dem-
onstrated that a two parameter characterization of crack tip fields in terms of K max = Bro ; T max =ro successfully correlates the
normalized opening load across variations of thickness, constraint level and material flow properties. Both negative and posi-
tive T-stresses reduce the through-thickness variation in local opening load levels along the crack front. They attributed the
observed difference in the tunneling profile of high constraint and low constraint specimens to T-stress, based on their 3D
interface-cohesive FEM. The zero through-thickness stress from the plane-stress condition severely restricts the achievable
range of stress triaxiality from the T-stress loading.
Sobotka and Dodds [304,305] showed the variation in the plastic wakes with various T-stress levels and that negative
T-stress significantly increases height of the plastic wake (hpw) and positive T-stress shows the same too but with less sig-
nificant consequences. Under plane-stress conditions, the T-stress does not show a pronounced effect on the elastic–plastic,
crack-tip fields. Carlyle and Dodds [306] demonstrated the applicability of the similarity scaling parameter for fatigue crack
closure in three-dimensional cracks under SSY.
Jogdand and Murthy [307] developed a new, simple efficient method—the interior collocation method, for simultaneous
estimation of the mixed-mode stress intensity factors (SIFs) and T-stresses using finite element computations. The results
obtained from the investigation for plane stress problems were validated by comparing with the published results
[111,118,261,308] and found to be in a very good agreement with them.
The studies [309–311] investigated the constraint behavior of T-stress. Chen and Wang [308,309] developed tables for
constraint sensitivity parameter (function of the fracture mechanism) for a range of ferritic materials with T-stress normal-
ized by yield stress or elasto-plastic Q-stress as constraint parameter. They showed Q-stress quantifies the out-of-plane load-
ing while T-stress does not.
5.4. FEM and plastic zone size
The following studies [304,305,312–316] used FEM to correlate the PZ size with the sign of T-stress. Sugimura et al. [316]
concluded that T-stress enhances the PZ size and negative T-stress intensifies shielding. Chen et al. [313] found that the effect
of T-stress is significant for nearly incompressible metallic foams. Galatenko and Kaminskii [314,315] concluded T-stress
accounts for the plastic constraint factor in quasibrittle cases.
Ben-Aoun and Pan [317] investigated the effects of T-stress on the mode I near-tip fields for elastic perfectly plastic pres-
sure-sensitive materials under plane-stress and SSY conditions. Their finite element results based on a two-parameter
boundary layer formulation showed that the total angular span of the plastic sectors of the near-tip fields increases with
increasing T-stress and shapes of the PZ. Also, the PZ height increased substantially as T-stress increased. Besides, Varias
and Shih [312] and Sobotka and Dodds [304] both showed the key role of the actively yielding region normal to the crack
plane, hpw, in energy dissipation during crack advance as it determines the plastic wake that trails the advancing front.
Kang and Beom [318] provided two models to predict the PZ size near a crack tip in a ductile layer sandwiched by two
rigid substrates, when the PZ size is larger than the layer thickness. They found that T-stress has a significant effect for mode I
but that the effect is rapidly weakened by addition of a mode II load component. This is expected from the theory of the ori-
gin of T-stress because it was a correction to the unexpected stress in the transverse direction under purely uniaxial longi-
tudinal loading. With the addition of a mode II, there arises a stress field in the transverse direction which mitigates the
effect of T-stress.
The studies mentioned in this subsection showed that T-stress presence results in a PZ size greater than T = 0. Positive
T-stress results in larger PZ sizes compared to negative T-stress.
5.5. FEM studies for J-integral and T-stress
Several researchers [319–324] studied the T-stress relationship of J-integral with FEM. Meliani et al. [323,324]assessed
the gouge defect in a pipe subjected to internal pressure based on the mesofracture Modified Notch Failure Assessment
Diagram (NMFAD) approach. They used MBL to study the fracture resistance, and found that the notch fracture toughness
is a linear decreasing function of the Teff,c-stress.
Burstow and Howard [325] showed the existence of high constraint at the crack tip for ductile crack growth due to
dominance of J-integral over T-stress, but this reduced significantly once the crack grew as the J-integral influence reduced.
In [326–328] Burstow et al. showed homogeneous T-stress cannot reproduce the complex stress fields due to material mis-
matching in welded joints, but that the T-stress has a similar effect on the geometrical constraint in overmatched materials
as in homogeneous materials. However, in an undermatched specimen T-stress has little to no effect on the crack tip stress
field. Karstensen [329] showed J-T characterization of crack tip stress fields failed at high levels of deformation. Hence,
T-stress fails to capture deformations correctly under LSY conditions.
Roy and Narasimhan [330] found that in mixed mode cases, positive T-stress retards the plastic flow localization in the
ligament, and that zero and negative T-stress results in rapid accumulation of plastic strain in the ligament. Roy and
Narasimhan [331] found that positive or zero T-stress favored J-dominance for the full range of near-tip mode mixity, while
negative T-stress causes loss of J-dominance within a narrow range of near-tip mixity close to mode I loading. Kim and Kang
[332] in their elastic–plastic FEM studies on mode-mixity showed that the shear stress remains unaffected by T-stress with
increasing mode-mixity, but that normal stresses are significantly affected in a manner similar to that seen in [228,333].
5.6. Thermal and residual stress effects with T-stress
The results from the studies [334–339] showed the effect of residual stresses on the constraint at the crack tip. These
studies demonstrated the convenience of indexing this constraint effect of the residual stresses with T-stress. Furthermore,
O’Dowd and Shih [339] through FEA showed the possibility of transferring a low constraint crack tip due to mechanical
loading into a high constraint crack tip with a thermal loading. T-stress was considered suitable to approximately quantify
the constraint at the crack tip due to both thermal and mechanical loadings.
Tvergaard [340] showed T-stress was unable to add to the fracture toughness in the absence of plasticity under SSY
considerations. In his cohesive model [341], he found the residual stresses around the growing crack acting as local tensile
T-stresses for reduction of plastic deformation. Qian et al. [156] studied the cleavage fracture modeling of reactor pressure
vessels under transient thermo-mechanical loading. Their results showed the influence of residual stresses on the constraint
can be indexed with T-stress, but Tvergaard [340] highlights the limitability of T-stress to influence the fracture toughness in
the absence of plasticity at the crack tip.
A number of studies [342–350] pertain to fracture mechanisms at the atomic scale. These studies find the T-stress influ-
ence to be same on the constraint as in the macro scale, i.e. negative T-stress results in plastic flow which causes crack
growth resistance. Vatne et al. [349,350] investigated fracture in BCC iron through multiscale simulations and found that
the influence of varying the constraint level through the T-stress displayed some sensitivity to whether the boundary dis-
placements field was defined using isotropic or anisotropic boundary conditions.
6. Other studies for T-stress
Castro et al. [351] and Sousa et al. [352] compared the PZ at the crack tip. They estimated the PZ using various methods
such as Equivalent Inglis plate, William’s seris only, William’s series and T-stress, etc. They showed that neither SIF nor
SIF + T-stress can predict the PZ correctly at the crack tip. It may be influenced by the nominal stress far away from the crack
tip. Sousa et al. [352] showed that T-stress improvements to the PZ are limited only to the medium nominal stress to yield
strength ratio.
Yeh et al. [353] studied the influence of T-stress on the PZ size of a precracked isotropic composite plate using various
failure criteria under tensile loading conditions. Their investigation indicated that the stress field with T-stress always yields
a larger PZ.
Hello et al. [354] developed the higher order stress field coefficients at the crack tip under mixed mode conditions. They
transformed Westergaard’s exact complex solutions into polar power and Laurent series defined in closed form and derived
exact analytical values of SIFs and T-stress from the power series definitions. Li and Xu [355] studied the change of T-stress
before and after crack kinking in two-dimensional elastic solids using the asymptotic analysis and the Westergaard function
method to estimate T-stress and SIFs of an infinitesimal kink. The contribution of the T-stress before crack kinking was
shown in both the T-stress and SIFs of the kinked crack. Besides this, they concluded that the sign of the kinked open crack
T-stress might be different from that of a main crack. Hence, simply using the sign of the T-stress before crack kinking is
insufficient to determine the crack growth stability. Li et al. [214] came to a similar conclusion.
7. The role of T-stress in Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics: a discussion
The above discussion mentioned the various applications of T-stress in LEFM. Its origin lies in the correction of the West-
ergaard biaxial stress field when applied for uniaxial loading. Among the abovementioned studies T-stress has consistently
been used for PZ correction, and as a constraint parameter. However, the results obtained from T-stress have lacked consis-
tency in predicting crack path stability.
T-stress corrects the stress field ahead of the crack tip and thus it enables us with more accurate estimation of fatigue life
as evidenced in [234]. Besides, research studies [138–143] have also mentioned that using further higher order terms
improves the stress field estimation. This is in compliance with the mathematical origin and function of the higher order
terms. However, the use of these higher order terms cannot create a new physical mechanism at the crack tip and thereby
cannot create an influence on the crack propagation but only improve their numerical evaluation.
Li et al. [356] studied the crack extension results from a closed crack in compression. They used KII, Tx and Ty with a mod-
ified MTS criterion to predict the crack kink angle. They concluded compressive Ty increases the kinking angle, and reinforced
apparent mode-II fracture toughness and vice versa. The results in [33] reported similar observation for T-stress values.
Leguillon and Murer [268] observed no crack kinking or branching in DCB and CT even for positive T-stress in their FEM
study, whereas, Williams and Ewing [9] observed in experiments that the crack path was initially stable for positive T-stress
before it deviated at an angle. The T-stress theory’s inability to provide correct results for crack paths in dynamic fracture
(Section 3.3) raises further concerns on the physics of the theory.
These results highlight the inconsistency of the T-stress theory in predicting crack paths accurately. In the following sub-
sections, the authors critically discuss the T-stress crack path stability theory and other mechanisms associated with T-stress
in LEFM considering the origin of T-stress
7.1. T-stress: a correction to the Westergaards biaxial stress field
T-stress was introduced to the Westergaard’s solution in order to eliminate the effect of the transverse stress which arises
in uniaxial loading. Westergaard took advantage of symmetry in problems to bring the two complex stress functions into one
(a) S (b) S
T-stress
S S
Fig. 4. Illustration of asymmetry in CT specimens: uniaxial loading (a) and with application of T-stress (b).
single Westergaard function. Therefore, it implicitly states that the fracture mechanics problems under consideration or
analysis with the Westergaard functions must be symmetrical similar to a biaxially loaded specimen.
Eftis [357] showed that symmetry is an appropriate condition for the application of the T-stress (the constant term in
[357]) to satisfy the boundary value problem. The T-stress when correctly applied in coherence with its origin would reduce
the CN specimen problem to the symmetrical problem.
Considering the arguments by Eftis [357] the correct application of T-stress should reduce the problem to a biaxially sym-
metric stress field problem. The CN specimen is one particular geometry which satisfies this boundary condition. However,
T-stress has repeatedly failed to predict the crack paths correctly in such specimens—experiments [9], dynamic fracture
[44–51], and analytical model for biaxial stress field [268,356] but the CT specimens do not satisfy this condition of biaxi-
ality. However, in literature the crack paths in the CT specimens are predicted correctly using the T-stress crack path stability
theory.
Let’s consider the CT specimens in Fig. 4. This asymmetry in the problem probably allows the investigators to neglect the
influence of in-plane bending on the crack path. Possibly, it is the in-plane bending constraint which curves the crack from its
initial path.
7.2. The origin of T-stress crack path prediction—a retake
Cotterell [4] established the T-stress theory for crack path prediction in CT specimens where he correlated the sign of
T-stress term in his paper to the direction of the isochromatic fringes which was similar to the fringes obtained by Guernsey
and Gilman [27] for a cleavage specimen. There have also been cases [21] where the theory failed. However, Cotterell [4]
overlooked the appropriate symmetry condition that T-stress should produce in the specimen in order to produce the biaxial
stress field of Westergaard [13] which is necessary in order to keep the relevance of the T-stress origin with its mathematics.
Cotterell [4] studied the isochromatic pattern of Guerney and Gilman [27] who used Berry’s [358] cleavage specimen as
reference for their study. In cleavage specimen the maximum tensile stress does not lie in a plane perpendicular to the crack
but in a plane whose normal is at an angle of roughly 800 to the direction of crack propagation. Hence, crack paths in cleavage
specimen have the tendency to deflect away from the expected straight path (Guerney and Gilman [27]). Therefore, to con-
trol crack paths in cleavage specimen Berry [358] used a groove, and Benbow and Roesler [359] used compressive stress to
keep the crack path stable. Guernsey and Gilman [27] initially used compressive transverse stresses similar to Benbow and
Roesler [359]. The compressive forces were used to eliminate any tensile forces parallel to the crack surfaces and keep the
crack paths stable. Guernsey and Gilman [27] obtained their fringe pattern after removing both the compressive stresses and
the wedge. Their crack paths were stable, and the isochromatic pattern observed by them [27] was leaning backward. Fur-
thermore, their [27] cleavage specimen was constraint against in-plane bending specimen while Cotterell’s [4] study of the
similar isochromatic fringes with CT specimen has no such constraint. Cotterell’s [4] correlation of positive T-stress with
unstable crack paths, and backward tilting fringes seems incorrect because Guerney and Gilman [27] reported their crack
paths to be stable with the backward tilting isochromatic fringes.
The specimen studied in Cotterell [4] is more similar to Benbow and Roesler [359] who applied the wedge through a pair
of clamps fastened to the specimen edge. These clamps provide compressive forces through a sliding motion and Benbow
and Roesler [359] attributed these external compressive forces to produce the stable path. They mentioned the possibility
of obtaining straight crack paths in certain materials without the use of compressive forces and also showed evidence that
applied lengthwise compression could produce stabilization of crack paths. They reasoned the bending nature of the CT spec-
imen to make the crack paths deviate from their stable paths. Leevers et al., [35–37] investigated this with the biaxiality
parameter affected the crack paths stability.
Fig. 5. Various zones at the crack tip.
Therefore, one could argue that T-stress could represent the applied transverse stresses to the specimen and their sign
represents tensile (positive) and compressive (negative) nature. However, the application of external transverse stresses
modifies the problem to a biaxial loading problem whereas, the original suggestion by Irwin [15] to use T-stress was to
correct the unaccounted stress that results ahead of the crack tip in the x -direction under uniaxial loading. Therefore, using
T-stress to represent the applied transverse stresses violates the mathematics of the origin of T-stress.
Therefore, T-stress theory for predicting crack paths which originated from Cotterell’s [4] observation must be modified
considering other parameters such as considering the T-stress at a critical distance ahead of the crack tip as suggested in
[10,143] or possibly discarded. Pook [360] suggested an alternative to T-stress for predicting crack path stability. He consid-
ered this due to T-stress failure to predict crack paths under certain conditions—cracks were stable for positive T-stress. He
suggested using the T-stress ratio as TR = 0.01T/K. Besides, the origin of T-stress implies that its application should make the
problem symmetrically biaxial like CN specimen and it cannot be applied to CT specimens. The failure to predict crack paths
correctly in CN specimens, where the fundamentals of its origin are adhered to, raises concerns over the application of the
theory. It is successful in CT specimens but it does not adhere to the fundamentals of the origin.
7.3. Plastic zone and T-stress
One may argue that the T-stress effects on PZ are analogous to the fringes lobes. However, one must remember that KI
also estimates PZ. T-stress correction to PZ is the consequence of the crack-tip constraint mechanism, and not because of
the crack path theory. Besides, close examination of the study [34,41,59] also shows T-stress increase and decrease is asso-
ciated with KI decrease or increase respectively. This is also expected because KI is used for estimating the PZ at the crack tip
in LEFM, but as it is limited by the yield stress, it fails to calculate the PZ size correctly. These errors are estimated correctly
with T-stress. Llopart [38] also showed the influence of T-stress on KI, i.e. increasing T-stress reduces KI.
Haefele and Lee [361] explicitly showed through a comparison of three different cases—horizontal crack under biaxial
load, inclined crack under biaxial load, and inclined crack under shear load—that the constant term improves the KI accuracy
and not KII significantly. Cracks are expected to grow perpendicular to the maximum principal stress or reducing KII. There-
fore, it is a safe assumption that any theory affecting the crack paths should also consider KII also, but other studies have also
shown that T-stress does not influence KII significantly [41,103] similar to Haefele and Lee [361]. The current authors want to
highlight that a theory that does not consider the role of KII in crack path prediction should not be used because the crack
paths are affected by the principal stress direction. And the principal stress direction is affected by KI and K II. Hence, it can be
again concluded that T-stress is a correction parameter for KI in LSY conditions.
This section further explains how T-stress influences PZ. The work done by an applied load in the material can be used by
the material for elastic deformation, plastic deformation or to extend the crack growth. Under SSY, defining elastic energy
release rate as G, the energy flow to the crack tip per unit of crack extension per unit length of crack front is mathematically
stated as follows:
1 #2 2
G¼ K ðplane strainÞ ð7Þ
E
Steady-state crack growth requires that the energy imparted to the material by the applied load be equal to the sum of (a)
the energy released at the crack tip, (b) plastic work in the active PZ, and (c) the residual strain energy deposited in the wake
in a unit of crack advance (see Fig. 5). The energy stored at the crack tip is the incremental strain energy that is used to
extend the crack length at the crack tip by breaking the surface bonds. Materials develop a PZ at the crack tip over a certain
load, and as the applied load increases, the PZ increases in size until the crack grows and the material behind the crack tip
unloads, forming a wake where the residual strain energy is stored.
Elastic strain energy is trapped within the plastic wake during steady crack growth, and it has no effect on the crack front
inelastic deformation. Larger plastic wakes also remove energy that would otherwise be available for the crack front loading.
Any increase in the plastic work or residual strain energy deposited in the wake must reduce the energy released at the crack
tip, because the sum total of the energy in the material remains constant under constant amplitude loading. Accordingly, the
(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 6. Active yielding regions for a steadily advancing crack under plane-strain above the crack plane—hpw—and ahead of the advancing crack front on the
crack plane, rp0 conditions for imposed zero (a), positive (b) and negative T-stress (c) [304].
strain energy released at the crack tip for crack growth is reduced and becomes negligible compared to the plastic work and
the elastic strain energy in the PZ. The lower energy at the crack-tip reduces the plastic deformation ahead of the crack front
which results in a decrease in the nearfield quantities—displacements, strains and stresses—which reduces K.
Sobotka and Dodds [304] showed the variation in the plastic wakes with various T-stress level and the plastic work and
elastic strain energy are associated with the plastic wake height, hpw (see Fig. 6). The T-stress effect limits the amount of
plastic deformation ahead of the advancing crack front (rpo in Fig. 6). The large plastic wakes accompanied with negative
T-stress store more elastic strain energy, reducing the energy at the crack tip that extends the crack growth. This results
in reduced near-field quantities under negative T-stress. One may expect, based on the energy balance argument and the fact
that the overall PZ size is smaller for T = 0 compared to T < 0, that near-tip strain levels will decrease for any loading with
negative T-stress (i.e. larger PZ), which in turn reduces K. The reduction of K values with negative T-stress has been reported
in [34,41,59].
7.4. Mechanism of crack tip constraint with T-stress
Because of its role in improving the PZ size at the crack tip in SSY and its mathematical origin to compensate the r0x that
arises due to Westergaards function in uniaxial loading, T-stress can be considered as a parameter affecting the stiffness of
the material under uniaxial loading, thus influencing the crack tip opening displacement and the crack tip constraint. This in
turn affects the PZ size, thereby correcting the PZ estimation when used with K to determine its size. T-stress changes the
value of K as expected from global conditions in LEFM by improving the ‘‘constraint effect.’’
The following studies [150,151,199,200,296,303,343–346] have shown T-stress to affect the constraint parameter. The
constraint effect of T-stress influences the size and shape of the PZ near the crack tip which results in a progressive loss
of crack tip constraint as T-stress became negative. The negative T-stress retards the mechanisms of ductile fracture. Appli-
cation of negative T-stress suppresses the multiple void growth mechanism, thereby increasing the crack growth resistance
The discussion in this section highlights the limitations of the original crack path theory stability associated with T-stress,
and why it should not be used for predicting the crack paths. It also discusses the role of T-stress in LEFM with consideration
of the energy balance to understand its influence on the PZ and crack tip constraint.
8. Conclusion
The paper summarized the results from the past six decades of studies on T-stress till the end of year 2012. It presents the
origin of T-stress, various experimental results for T-stress on crack path stabilities, analytical techniques and FEM tech-
niques for evaluating T-stress, and T-stress effects on the plastic zone and constraint parameter. The authors emphasize
the following about T-stress:
T-stress is a boundary effect as evidenced by the following studies [21,33,362].
T-stress affects the plastic zone size [7,290,316].
T-stress affects the crack tip constraint [288,297,304].
Although there are studies linking the T-stress with the crack path stability, there exist several studies—experimental
[21,35–37,103,363], analytical [5,215] which contradict this theory. Therefore, it is imprudent to pursue this theory with-
out caution and it must be reassessed with relevance to its mathematical origin.
The T-stress sign and magnitude are affected by the material non-homogeneity [169,282]. T-stress in anisotropic mate-
rials is affected by the anisotropy and elastic mismatched [282].
In T-stress studies on piezoelectric and pressure-sensitive materials [146,209,226,301,317,364], it was shown to be

affected by the elastic and electric constants (positive charge increased the T-stress), affected the crack kinking behavior,
and the PZ shapes
T-stress is unable to predict crack paths in dynamic crack growth [44–51].
The sign of T-stress determines the shielding or anti-shielding behavior of the plastic zone shape and size at the crack tip
[8,24,205,206].
Acknowledgments
This research was carried out under the project number M11.4.10407 in the framework of the Research Program of the
Materials innovation institute M2i (www.m2i.nl), the former Netherlands Institute for Metals Research, co-funded by FMLC.
References
[1] Erdogan F, Sih GC. On the crack extension in plates under plane loading and transverse shear. J Basic Eng 1963:519–27.
[2] Sih GC. A special theory of crack propagation Mechanics of Fracture Initiation and Propagation, Vol. 11. Netherlands: Springer; 1991. pp. 1–22.
[3] Cotterell B, Rice JR. Slightly curved or kinked cracks. Int J Fract 1980;16(2):155–69.
[4] Cotterell B. Notes on Paths and Stability of Cracks. Int J Fract Mech 1966;2(3):526–33.
[5] Melin S. The influence of the T-stress on the directional stability of cracks. Int J Fract 2002;114(3):259–65.
[6] Smith DJ, Ayatollahi MR, Pavier MJ. On the consequences of T-stress in elastic brittle fracture. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical,
Physical and Engineering Science 2006;462(2072):2415–37.
[7] Larsson SG, Carlsson AJ. Influence of non-singular stress terms and specimen geometry on small-scale yielding at crack tips in elastic-plastic materials.
J Mech Phys Solids 1973;21(4):263–77.
[8] Zhou R, Zhu P, Li Z. The Shielding Effect of the Plastic Zone at Mode-II Crack Tip. Int J Fract 2011;171(2):195–200.
[9] Williams J, Ewing PD. Fracture Under Complex Stress - Angled Crack Problem. Int J FractMech 1972;8(4):441–6.
[10] Finnie I, Saith A. A note on the angled crack problem and the directional stability of cracks. Int J Fract 1973;9(4):484–6.
[11] Sherry AH, France CC, Goldthorpe MR. COMPENDIUM OF T-STRESS SOLUTIONS FOR TWO AND THREE DIMENSIONAL CRACKED GEOMETRIES. Fatigue
Fract Eng Mater Struct 1995;18(1):141–55.
[12] Chen YZ. Integral equation methods for multiple crack problems and related topics. Appl Mech Rev 2007;60(1–6):172–94.
[13] Westergaard. Bearing pressure and cracks. J Appl Mech 1939;6:A49–53.
[14] Tada H, Paris PC, Irwin GR. The Stress Analysis of Cracks Handbook. 3rd ed. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 2000.
[15] Irwin, G.R. ’’Fracture’’, in Handbuch der Physik VI, 1958.
[16] Wells AA, Post D. The dynamic stress distribution surrounding a running crack - A photoelastic analysis. Proceedings of the society for experimental
stress analysis 1958;16(1):93–6.
[17] Williams ML. Stress distribution at the base of a stationary crack. J Appl Mech 1957:109–14.
[18] Pham VB, Bahr HA, Bahr U, Fett T, Balke H. Crack paths and the problem of global directional stability. Int J Fract 2006;141(3–4):513–34.
[19] Ramesh K. Generalised Westergaard approach, vol. 2012, Chennai, India, 2012.
[20] Ramesh K, Gupta S, Kelkar AA. Evaluation of stress field parameters in fracture mechanics by photoelasticity—Revisited. Eng Fract Mech
1997;56(1):25–45.
[21] Sanford RJ. A critical re-examination of the westergaard method for solving opening-mode crack problems. Mech Res Commun 1979;6(5):289–94.
[22] Atluri SN, Kobayashi AS. Mechanical response of materials. Handbook On Experimental Mechanics. Prentice-Hall; 1987.
[23] Christopher CJ, James MN, Patterson EA, Tee KF. A quantitative evaluation of fatigue crack shielding forces using photoelasticity. Eng Fract Mech
2008;75(14):4190–9.
[24] Han JJ, Chen YH. T-effect for the interaction problem of an interface macrocrack with a near-tip microvoid. Int J Fract 2000;102(3):205–22.
[25] Colombo C, Du Y, James MN, Patterson EA, Vergani L. On crack tip shielding due to plasticity-induced closure during an overload. Fatigue Fract Eng
Mater Struct 2010;33(12):766–77.
[26] Spaniel M, Jurenka J, Kuzelka J. Verification of FE model of fatigue crack propagation under mixed mode conditions. Meccanica 2009;44(2):189–95.
[27] Guernsey R, Gilman J. Photoelastic study of the stresses near a cleavage crack. Exp Mech 1961;1(8):50–4.
[28] Ayatollahi MR, Safari H. Evaluation of crack tip constraint using photoelasticity. Int J Press Vessels Pip 2003;80(9):665–70.
[29] Ayatollahi MR, Smith DJ, Pavier MJ. Crack-tip constraint in mode II deformation. Int J Fract 2002;113(2):153–73.
[30] Zakeri M, Ayatollahi MR, Guagliano M. A Photoelastic Study of T-stress in Centrally Cracked Brazilian Disc Specimen Under Mode II Loading. Strain
2011;47(3):268–74.
[31] Ayatollahi MR, Zakeri M. T-Stress Effects on Isochromatic Fringe Patterns in Mode II. Int J Fract 2007;143(2):189–94.
[32] Zanaganeh M, Tomlinson RA, Yates JR. T-stress determination using thermoelastic stress analysis. J Strain Anal Engng 2008;43.
[33] Shahani AR, Tabatabaei SA. Effect of T-stress on the fracture of a four point bend specimen. Mater Des 2009:30.
[34] 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.
[35] Leevers PS, Radon JC, Culver LE. Fracture trajectories in a biaxially stressed plate. J Mech Phys Solids 1976;24(6):381–95.
[36] Leevers PS, Culver LE, Radon JC. Fatigue crack growth in PMMA and rigid PVC under biaxial stress. Eng Fract Mech 1979;11(3):487–98.
[37] Leevers PS, Radon JC. Inherent stress biaxiality in various fracture specimen geometries. Int J Fract 1982;19(4):311–25.
[38] Llopart L, Kurz B, Wellhausen C, Anglada M, Drechsler K, Wolf K. Investigation of fatigue crack growth and crack turning on integral stiffened
structures under mode I loading. Eng Fract Mech 2006;73(15):2139–52.
[39] Matvienko YG. Maximum Average Tangential Stress Criterion for Prediction of the Crack Path. Int J Fract 2012;176(1):113–8.
[40] Ki Ju K. Criteria for kinking out of interface crack. Eng Fract Mech 1994;49(4):587–98.
[41] Hallback N, Nilsson F. Mixed-mode I/II fracture behaviour of an aluminium alloy. Journal of Mechanics of Physics and solids 1994;42(9):1345–74.
[42] Streit R, Finnie I. An experimental investigation of crack-path directional stability. Exp Mech 1980;20(1):17–23.
[43] Joyce JA. Experimental justification for proposed changes to the measurement of K-Ic using ASTM E 399. J Test Eval 1998;26(5):455–62.
[44] Yang B, Ravi-Chandar K. Evaluation of elastic T-stress by the stress difference method. Eng Fract Mech 1999;64(5):589–605.
[45] Yang B, Ravi-Chandar K. Crack path instabilities in a quenched glass plate. J Mech Phys Solids 2001;49(1):91–130.
[46] Shin DK, Lee JJ. Fracture parameters of interfacial crack of bimaterial under the impact loading. Int J Solids Struct 2001;38(30–31):5303–22.
[47] Yoneyama S, Sakaue K, Kikuta H, Takashi M. Instantaneous phase-stepping photoelasticity for the study of crack growth behaviour in a quenched thin
glass plate. Meas Sci Technol 2006;17(12):3309–16.
[48] Sakaue K, Yoneyama S, Kikuta H, Takashi M. Evaluating crack tip stress field in a thin glass plate under thermal load. Eng Fract Mech
2008;75(5):1015–26.
[49] Yoneyama S, Sakaue K, Kikuta H, Takashi M. Observation of stress field around an oscillating crack tip in a quenched thin glass plate. Exp Mech
2008;48(3):367–74.
[50] Jayadevan KR, Narasimhan R, Ramamurthy TS, Dattaguru B. A numerical study of T-stress in dynamically loaded fracture specimens. Int J Solids Struct
2001;38(28–29):4987–5005.
[51] Guduru V, Phan AV, Tippur HV. Transient analysis of the DSIFs and dynamic T-stress for particulate composite materials-Numerical vs. experimental
results. Eng Anal Boundary Elem 2010;34(11):963–70.
[52] Xu LR, Wang P. Dynamic fracture mechanics analysis of failure mode transitions along weakened interfaces in elastic solids. Eng Fract Mech
2006;73(12):1597–614.
[53] Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM. Cracked Brazilian disc specimen subjected to mode II deformation. Eng Fract Mech 2005;72(4):493–503.
[54] Ayatollahi MR, Asadkarami A, Zakeri M. Finite element evaluation of punch-type crack specimens. Int J Press Vessels Pip 2005;82(9):722–8.
[55] Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM. On determination of mode II fracture toughness using semi-circular bend specimen. Int J Solids Struct
2006;43(17):5217–27.
[56] Ayatollahi MR, Zakeri M. T stress effects on isochromatic fringe patterns in Mode II. Int J Fatigue 2007;143.
[57] Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM. Fracture toughness study for a brittle rock subjected to mixed mode I/II loading. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
2007;44(4):617–24.
[58] Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM. Wide range data for crack tip parameters in two disc-type specimens under mixed mode loading. Comput Mater Sci
2007;38(4):660–70.
[59] Ayatollahi MR, Hashemi R. Mixed mode fracture in an inclined center crack repaired by composite patching. Compos Struct 2007;81(2):264–73.
[60] Ayatollahi MR, Hashemi R. Computation of stress intensity factors (K-I, K-II) and T-stress for cracks reinforced by composite patching. Compos Struct
2007;78(4):602–9.
[61] Zakeri M, Ayatollahi MR, Nikoobin A. Photoelastic study of a center-cracked plate - The lateral load effects. Comput Mater Sci 2007;41(2):168–76.
[62] Aliha MRM, Ayatollahi MR. On mixed-mode I/II crack growth in dental resin materials. Scripta Mater 2008;59(2):258–61.
[63] Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM. Mixed mode fracture analysis of polycrystalline graphite - A modified MTS criterion. Carbon 2008;46(10):1302–8.
[64] Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM. On the use of Brazilian disc specimen for calculating mixed mode I-II fracture toughness of rock materials. Eng Fract Mech
2008;75(16):4631–41.
[65] Ayatollahi MR, Bagherifard S. Brittle fracture analysis of the offset-crack DCDC specimen. Structural Engineering and Mechanics 2008;29(3):301–10.
[66] Aliha MRM, Ayatollahi MR. Brittle fracture evaluation of a fine grain cement mortar in combined tensile-shear deformation. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater
Struct 2009;32(12):987–94.
[67] Aliha MRM, Ayatollahi MR, Kharazi B. Mode II Brittle Fracture Assessment Using ASFPB Specimen. Int J Fract 2009;159(2):241–6.
[68] Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM. Mixed mode fracture in soda lime glass analyzed by using the generalized MTS criterion. Int J Solids Struct
2009;46(2):311–21.
[69] Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM. Analysis of a new specimen for mixed mode fracture tests on brittle materials. Eng Fract Mech 2009;76(11):1563–73.
[70] Ayatollahi MR, Bagherifard S. Numerical analysis of an improved DCDC specimen for investigating mixed mode fracture in ceramic materials. Comput
Mater Sci 2009;46(1):180–5.
[71] Mostafavi M, Smith DJ, Pavier MJ. Quantification of constraint effects in fracture mechanism transition for cracked structures under mixed mode
loading. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2009;32(1):5–17.
[72] Aliha MRM, Ayatollahi MR. Geometry effects on fracture behaviour of polymethyl methacrylate. Materials Science and Engineering a-Structural
Materials Properties Microstructure and Processing 2010;527(3):526–30.
[73] Ayatollahi MR, Dehghany M. On T-Stresses Near V-Notches. Int J Fract 2010;165(1):121–6.
[74] Ayatollahi MR, Sedighiani K. Crack tip plastic zone under Mode I, Mode II and mixed mode (I plus II) conditions. Structural Engineering and Mechanics
2010;36(5):575–98.
[75] Ayatollahi MR, Torabi AR. Determination of mode II fracture toughness for U-shaped notches using Brazilian disc specimen. Int J Solids Struct
2010;47(3–4):454–65.
[76] Saghafi H, Ayatollahi MR, Sistaninia M. A modified MTS criterion (MMTS) for mixed-mode fracture toughness assessment of brittle materials.
Materials Science and Engineering a-Structural Materials Properties Microstructure and Processing 2010;527(21–22):5624–30.
[77] Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM. Fracture Analysis of Some Ceramics Under Mixed Mode Loading. J Am Ceram Soc 2011;94(2):561–9.
[78] Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM, Saghafi H. An improved semi-circular bend specimen for investigating mixed mode brittle fracture. Eng Fract Mech
2011;78(1):110–23.
[79] Ayatollahi MR, Dehghany M, Nejati M. Fracture analysis of V-notched components - Effects of first non-singular stress term. Int J Solids Struct
2011;48(10):1579–89.
[80] Ayatollahi MR, Nejati M. Determination of NSIFs and coefficients of higher order terms for sharp notches using finite element method. Int J Mech Sci
2011;53(3):164–77.
[81] Ayatollahi MR, Nejati M. An over-deterministic method for calculation of coefficients of crack tip asymptotic field from finite element analysis.
Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2011;34(3):159–76.
[82] Aliha MRM, Ayatollahi MR. Analysis of fracture initiation angle in some cracked ceramics using the generalized maximum tangential stress criterion.
Int J Solids Struct 2012;49(13):1877–83.
[83] Ayatollahi MR, Sedighiani K. A T-stress controlled specimen for mixed mode fracture experiments on brittle materials. European Journal of Mechanics
a-Solids 2012;36:83–93.
[84] Saghafi H, Monemian S. A New Fracture Toughness Test Covering Mixed-Mode Conditions and Positive and Negative T-Stresses. Int J Fract
2010;165(1):135–8.
[85] Ayatollahi MR, Pavier MJ, Smith DJ. Mode I cracks subjected to large T-stresses. Int J Fract 2002;117(2):159–74.
[86] Chao YJ, Liu S, Broviak BJ. Brittle fracture: Variation of fracture toughness with constraint and crack curving under mode I conditions. Exp Mech
2001;41(3):232–41.
[87] Abanto-Bueno J, Lambros J. Parameters controlling fracture resistance in functionally graded materials under mode I loading. Int J Solids Struct
2006;43(13):3920–39.
[88] Kobayashi T, Morita S, Toda H. Fracture toughness evaluation and specimen size effect. Mater Trans, JIM 2001;42(1):52–7.
[89] Tronskar JP, Mannan MA, Lai MO. Accounting for constraint effects in fracture mechanics analysis of floating production, storage and off-loading
vessels and ships. Eng Fract Mech 2002;69(11):1219–48.
[90] Moustabchir H, Azari Z, Hariri S, Dmytrakh I. Experimental and computed stress distribution ahead of a notch in a pressure vessel: Application of T-
stress conception. Comput Mater Sci 2012;58:59–66.
[91] Srinivas M, Kamat SV, Rao PR. Influence of mixed mode I/III loading on fracture toughness of mild steel at various strain rates. Mater Sci Technol
2004;20(2):235–42.
[92] Jernkvist LO. Fracture of wood under mixed mode loading II. Experimental investigation of Picea abies. Eng Fract Mech 2001;68(5):565–76.
[93] Hohe J, Hebel J, Friedmann V, Siegele D. Probabilistic failure assessment of ferritic steels using the master curve approach including constraint effects.
Eng Fract Mech 2007;74(8):1274–92.
[94] Sumpter JDG, Hancock JW. Shallow crack toughness of HY80 welds - an analysis based on T-stresses. Int J Press Vessels Pip 1991;45(2):207–21.
[95] Chang Y-S, Kim Y-J, Stumpfrock L. Development of cleavage fracture toughness locus considering constraint effects. KSME International Journal
2004;18(12):2158–73.
[96] Hebel J, Hohe J, Friedmann V, Siegele D. Experimental and numerical analysis of in-plane and out-of-plane crack tip constraint characterization by
secondary fracture parameters. Int J Fract 2007;146(3):173–88.
[97] Roos E, Stumpfrock L, Schuler X, Eisele U. Fracture mechanics safety analysis of components based on fracture mechanics characteristics combined
with multiaxiality of the stress state. Int J Press Vessels Pip 2005;82(5):355–62.
[98] Gao X, Dodds RH, Tregoning RL, Joyce JA. Prediction of the T0 Shift between Specimens of Different Constraints Using the T-Stress Based T-Functions.
Int J Fract 2000;104(3):1–8.
[99] Henry BS, Luxmoore AR, Sumpter JDG. Elastic-plastic fracture mechanics assessment of low constraint aluminium test specimens. Int J Fract
1996;81(3):217–34.
[100] Henry BS, Luxmoore AR. Three-dimensional evaluation of the T-stress in centre cracked plates. Int J Fract 1994;70(1):35–50.
[101] Nilsson KF, Taylor N, Minnebo P. Analysis of fracture tests on large bend beams containing an embedded flaw. Int J Press Vessels Pip
2006;83(1):72–83.
[102] Wallin K. Quantifying T-stress controlled constraint by the master curve transition temperature T-0. Eng Fract Mech 2001;68(3):303–28.
[103] Hallbäck N, Jönsson N. T-stress evaluations of mixed mode I/II fracture specimens and T-effects on mixed mode failure of aluminium. Int J Fract
1995;76(2):141–68.
[104] Wang P, Xu LR. Dynamic interfacial debonding initiation induced by an incident crack. Int J Solids Struct 2006;43(21):6535–50.
[105] Bueckner HF. A novel principle for computation of stress intensity factors. Zeitschrift Fur Angewandte Mathematik Und Mechanik 1970;50(9). p. 529-
&.
[106] Fett T. A compendium of T-Stress Solutions. Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe; 1998.
[107] Fett T. T-stresses for cracks ahead of slender notches. Int J Fract 1996;82(2):R33–7.
[108] Fett T. A Green’s function for T-stresses in an edge-cracked rectangular plate. Eng Fract Mech 1997;57(4):365–73.
[109] Fett T. An approximative Green’s function for T-stresses in edge-cracked discs. Int J Fract 1997;83(4):L53–7.
[110] Fett T. Friction-induced bridging effects caused by the T-stress. Eng Fract Mech 1998;59(5):599–606.
[111] Fett T. Stress intensity factors and T-stress in edge-cracked rectangular plates under mixed boundary conditions. Eng Fract Mech 1998;60(5–
6):625–30.
[112] Fett T. T-stresses in rectangular phases and circular disks. Eng Fract Mech 1998;60(5–6):631–52.
[113] Fett T, Munz D, Dai X, White KW. Bridging stress relation from a combined evaluation of the R-curve and post-fracture tensile tests. Int J Fract
2000;104(4):375–85.
[114] Fett T. Stress intensity factors and T-stress for internally cracked circular disks under various boundary conditions. Eng Fract Mech
2001;68(9):1119–36.
[115] Fett T. Stress intensity factors and T-stress for single and double-edge-cracked circular disks under mixed boundary conditions. Eng Fract Mech
2002;69(1):69–83.
[116] Fett T, Munz D. T-stress and crack path stability of DCDC specimens. Int J Fract 2003;124(1–2):L165–70.
[117] Fett T, Rizzi G. Fracture mechanics parameters of crack surface zones under volumetric strains. Int J Fract 2004;127(1):L117–24.
[118] Fett T, Rizzi G. Weight functions for stress intensity factors and tstress for oblique cracks in a half-space. Int J Fract 2005;132(1):L9–L16.
[119] Fett T, Rizzi G, Munz D. T-stress solution for DCDC specimens. Eng Fract Mech 2005;72(1):145–9.
[120] Fett T, Munz D. Influence of narrow starter notches on the initial crack growth resistance curve of ceramics. Arch Appl Mech 2006;76(11–12):667–79.
[121] Fett T, Rizzi G. T-stress of cracks loaded by near-tip tractions. Eng Fract Mech 2006;73(13):1940–6.
[122] Fett T, Rizzi G, Munz D, Hoffmann M, Oberacker R, Wagner S. Bridging interactions in ceramics and consequences on crack path stability. J Ceram Soc
Jpn 2006;114(1335):1038–43.
[123] Theo Fett GR, Hans-Achim Bahr. Green’s functions for the T-stress of small kink and fork cracks. Eng Fract Mech 2006;73.
[124] Fett T, Rizzi G, Bahr HA, Bahr U, Pham VB, Balke H. Analytical solutions for stress intensity factor, T-stress and weight function for the edge-cracked
half-space. Int J Fract 2007;146(3):189–95.
[125] Fett T, Rizzi G, Guin JP, Lopez-Cepero JM, Wiederhorn SM. A fracture mechanics analysis of the double cleavage drilled compression test specimen.
Eng Fract Mech 2009;76(7):921–34.
[126] Xiao QZ, Karihaloo BL. Approximate Green’s functions for singular and higher order terms of an edge crack in a finite plate. Eng Fract Mech
2002;69(8):959–81.
[127] Sham TL. A unified finite element method for determining weight functions in two and three dimensions. Int J Solids Struct 1987;23(10):1357–72.
[128] Sham TL. The theory of higher order weight functions for linear elastic plane problems. Int J Solids Struct 1989;25(4):357–80.
[129] Sham TL. The determination of the elastic T-term using higher order weight functions. Int J Fract 1991;48(2):81–102.
[130] Li J, Tan CL, Wang X. Weight functions for T-stress for edge cracks in thick-walled cylinders. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology-Transactions of the
Asme 2005;127(4):457–63.
[131] Beghini M, Bertini L, DiPuccio F. Non singular terms in crack tip stress distribution for plane problems. Warley: Engineering Materials Advisory
Services Ltd; 1996.
[132] Lewis T, Wang X. The T-stress solutions for through-wall circumferential cracks in cylinders subjected to general loading conditions. Eng Fract Mech
2008;75(10):3206–25.
[133] Wang X. Determination of weight functions for elastic T-stress from reference T-stress solutions. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2002;25(10):965–73.
[134] Cui YQ, Yang W, Zhong Z. Green’s function for T-stress of semi-infinite plane crack. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics-English Edition
2011;32(8):973–80.
[135] Rice JR. Some remarks on elastic crack-tip stress fields. Int J Solids Struct 1972;8(6):751–8.
[136] Westram I, Ricoeur A, Emrich A, Rödel J, Kuna M. Fatigue crack growth law for ferroelectrics under cyclic electrical and combined electromechanical
loading. J Eur Ceram Soc 2007;27(6):2485–94.
[137] Parameswaran V, Shukla A. Asymptotic Stress Fields for Stationary Cracks Along the Gradient in Functionally Graded Materials. J Appl Mech
2002;69(3):240–3.
[138] Hello G, Ben Tahar M, Roelandt JM. Analytical determination of coefficients in crack-tip stress expansions for a finite crack in an infinite plane
medium. Int J Solids Struct 2012;49(3-4):556–66.
[139] Nazarali Q, Wang X. The effect of T-stress on crack-tip plastic zones under mixed-mode loading conditions. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2011. pp.
no-no.
[140] Zappalorto M, Lazzarin P. On the intensity of linear elastic high order singularities ahead of cracks and re-entrant corners. Int J Solids Struct
2011;48(6):953–61.
[141] Berto F, Lazzarin P. On higher order terms in the crack tip stress field. Int J Fract 2010.
[142] Chen YZ. Stress analysis for an infinite strip weakned by periodic cracks. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics-English Edition
2004;25(11):1298–303.
[143] Leguillon D. Asymptotic and numerical analysis of a crack branching in non-isotropic materials. European Journal of Mechanics and Solids
1993;12(1):33–51.
[144] Rice JR. A PATH INDEPENDENT INTEGRAL AND APPROXIMATE ANALYSIS OF STRAIN CONCENTRATION BY NOTCHES AND CRACKS. J Appl Mech
1968;35(2). 379-+.
[145] Chen FHK, Shield RT. CONSERVATION LAWS IN ELASTICITY OF J-INTEGRAL TYPE. Z Angew Math Phys 1977;28(1):1–22.
[146] Li XF, Lee KY. Fracture analysis of cracked piezoelectric materials. Int J Solids Struct 2004;41(15):4137–61.
[147] Park SB, Sun CT. FRACTURE CRITERIA FOR PIEZOELECTRIC CERAMICS. J Am Ceram Soc 1995;78(6):1475–80.
[148] Chen Y-H, Hasebe N. Explicit formulations of the J-integral considering higher order singular terms in eigenfunction expansion forms Part I. Analytical
treatments. Int J Fract 1997;85(1):11–34.
[149] Kim JK, Cho SB. Effect of second non-singular term of mode I near the tip of a V-notched crack. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2009;32(4):346–56.
[150] Nakamura T, Parks DM. DETERMINATION OF ELASTIC T-STRESS ALONG 3-DIMENSIONAL CRACK FRONTS USING AN INTERACTION INTEGRAL. Int J
Solids Struct 1992;29(13):1597–611.
[151] Zhao LG, Tong J, Byrne J. Stress intensity factor K and the elastic T-stress for corner cracks. Int J Fract 2001;109(2):209–25.
[152] Ananthasayanam B, Capitaneanu M, Joseph PF. Determination of higher order coefficients and zones of dominance using a singular integral equation
approach. Eng Fract Mech 2007;74(13):2099–131.
[153] Li XF. Dynamic T-stress for a mode-I crack in an infinite elastic plane. Journal of Applied Mechanics-Transactions of the Asme 2007;74(2):378–81.
[154] Li XF. T-stress near the tips of a cruciform crack with unequal arms. Eng Fract Mech 2006;73(6):671–83.
[155] Qian XD. K-I-T estimation for embedded flaws in pipes - Part II: Circumferentially oriented cracks. Int J Press Vessels Pip 2010;87(4):150–64.
[156] Qian XD, Dodds RH, Yin SJ, Bass R. Cleavage fracture modeling of pressure vessels under transient thermo-mechanical loading. Eng Fract Mech
2008;75(14):4167–89.
[157] Liu D, Fleck NA. Scale effects in the initiation of cracking of a scarf joint. Int J Fract 1999;95(1–4):67–88.
[158] Tian CL, Gao YX. Role of elasticity in elastic-plastic fracture. Analytical bi-linear crack-tip fields and finite element analysis. Int J Solids Struct
2005;42(3–4):951–70.
[159] Tian CL, Cui WC. T-stress in elastic-plastic crack-tip fields. Int J Fract 2005;136(1–4):L9–L14.
[160] Chen CS, Krause R, Pettit RG, Banks-Sills L, Ingraffea AR. Numerical assessment of T-stress computation using a p-version finite element method. Int J
Fract 2001;107(2):177–99.
[161] Yu J, Tan CL, Wang X. T-stress solutions for cracks emanating from a circular hole in a finite plate. Int J Fract 2006;140(1–4):293–8.
[162] Olsen PC. Determining the stress intensity factors KI, KII and the T-term via the conservation laws using the boundary element method. Eng Fract
Mech 1994;49(1):49–60.
[163] Kfouri AP. Some evaluations of the elastic T-term using Eshelby’s method. Int J Fract 1986;30(4):301–15.
[164] Zhou C, Li ZH. The effect of T-stress on crack-inclusion interaction under mode I loading. Mech Res Commun 2007;34(3):283–8.
[165] Walters MC, Paulino GH, Dodds RH. Computation of mixed-mode stress intensity factors for cracks in three-dimensional functionally graded solids.
Journal of Engineering Mechanics-Asce 2006;132(1):1–15.
[166] Kim JH, Paulino GH. Consistent formulations of the interaction integral method for fracture of functionally graded materials. Journal of Applied
Mechanics-Transactions of the Asme 2005;72(3):351–64.
[167] Sutradhar A, Paulino GH. Symmetric Galerkin boundary element computation of T-stress and stress intensity factors for mixed-mode cracks by the
interaction integral method. Eng Anal Boundary Elem 2004;28(11):1335–50.
[168] Paulino GH, Kim J-H. A new approach to compute T-stress in functionally graded materials by means of the interaction integral method. Eng Fract
Mech 2004;71(13–14):1907–50.
[169] Kim J-H, Paulino G. T-stress in orthotropic functionally graded materials: Lekhnitskii and Stroh formalisms. Int J Fract 2004;126(4):345–84.
[170] Kim JH, Moon HJ, Earmme YY. Inplane and antiplane T-stresses for an interface crack in anisotropic bimaterial. Mech Mater 2001;33(1):21–32.
[171] Moon HJ, Earmme YY. Calculation of elastic T-stresses near interface crack tip under in-plane and anti-plane loading. Int J Fract 1998;91(2):179–95.
[172] Cho YJ, Beom HG, Earmme YY. Application of a conservation integral to an interface crack interacting with singularities. Int J Fract 1994;65(1):63–73.
[173] Shah PD, Tan CL, Wang X. T-stress solutions for two-dimensional crack problems in anisotropic elasticity using the boundary element method.
[174] Yau JF, Wang SS, Corten HT. A MIXED-MODE CRACK ANALYSIS OF ISOTROPIC SOLIDS USING CONSERVATION-LAWS OF ELASTICITY. Journal of Applied
Mechanics-Transactions of the Asme 1980;47(2):335–41.
[175] Chiang CR. Kinked cracks in an anisotropic material. Eng Fract Mech 1991;39(5):927–30.
[176] Sladek J, Sladek V. Computation of thermoelastoplastic stresses in crack problems by the BEM. Int J Fract 1997;83(4):359–78.
[177] Sladek J, Sladek V. Evaluation of T-stresses and stress intensity factors in stationary thermoelasticity by the conservation integral method. Int J Fract
1997;86(3):199–219.
[178] Sladek J, Sladek V. Evaluations of the T-stress for interface cracks by the boundary element method. Eng Fract Mech 1997;56(6):813–25.
[179] Sladek J, Sladek V, Fedelinski P. Integral formulation for elastodynamic T-stresses. Int J Fract 1997;84(2):103–16.
[180] Sladek J, Sladek V, Fedelinski P. Computation of the second fracture parameter in elastodynamics by the boundary element method. Adv Eng Softw
1999;30(9–11):725–34.
[181] Sladek J, Sladek V. Evaluation of the elastic T-stress in three-dimensional crack problems using an integral formula. Int J Fract 2000;101(4):L47–52.
[182] Yang S, Yuan FG. Determination and representation of the stress coefficient terms by path-independent integrals in anisotropic cracked solids. Int J
Fract 2000;101(4):291–319.
[183] Yang S, Yuan FG. Kinked crack in anisotropic bodies. Int J Solids Struct 2000;37(45):6635–82.
[184] Yuan FG, Yang S. Crack-tip fields for matrix cracks between dissimilar elastic and creeping materials. Int J Fract 2000;103(4):327–60.
[185] Yuan FG, Yang S. Asymptotic crack-tip fields in an anisotropic plate subjected to bending, twisting moments and transverse shear loads. Compos Sci
Technol 2000;60(12–13):2489–502.
[186] Yuan FG, Yang S. Crack-tip field in anisotropic shells. Int J Fract 2002;113:309–26.
[187] Profant T, Sevecek O, Kotoul M. Calculation of K-factor and T-stress for cracks in anisotropic bimaterials. Eng Fract Mech 2008;75.
[188] Sevecek O, Kotoul M, Profant T. Effect of higher order asymptotic terms on the competition between crack penetration and debond at a bimaterial
interface between aligned orthotropic materials. Eng Fract Mech 2012;80:28–51.
[189] Choi ST, Shin H, Earmme YY. On the unified approach to anisotropic and isotropic elasticity for singularity, interface and crack in dissimilar media. Int
J Solids Struct 2003;40(6):1411–31.
[190] Lee H, Kim YJ. Interfacial crack-tip constraints and J-integral for bi-materials with plastic hardening mismatch. Int J Fract 2007;143(3):231–43.
[191] Kim JH, Vlassak JJ. T-stress of a bi-material strip under generalized edge loads. Int J Fract 2006;142(3–4):315–22.
[192] Suo Z. Singularities, Interfaces and cracks in dissimilar media. Proceedings of the royal society of London series 1990:427.
[193] Fleck NA, Hutchinson JW, Zhigang S. Crack path selection in a brittle adhesive layer. Int J Solids Struct 1991;27(13):1683–703.
[194] Yu HJ, Wu LZ, Guo LC, Li H, Du SY. T-stress evaluations for nonhomogeneous materials using an interaction integral method. Int J Numer Meth Eng
2012;90(11):1393–413.
[195] Yu HJ, Wu LZ, Li H. T-stress evaluations of an interface crack in the materials with complex interfaces. Int J Fract 2012;177(1):25–37.
[196] Chen SH, Wang TC, Kao-Walter S. A crack perpendicular to the bimaterial interface in finite solid. Int J Solids Struct 2003;40(11):2731–55.
[197] Karihaloo BL, Keer LM, Nemat-Nasser S. Crack kinking under nonsymmetric loading. Eng Fract Mech 1980;13(4):879–88.
[198] Wang X, Lewis T, Bell R. Estimations of the T-stress for small cracks at notches. Eng Fract Mech 2006;73(3):366–75.
[199] Meshii T, Tanaka T, Lu K. T-Stress solutions for a semi-elliptical axial surface crack in a cylinder subjected to mode-I non-uniform stress distributions.
Eng Fract Mech 2010;77(13):2467–78.
[200] Meshii T, Tanaka T. Experimental T-33-stress formulation of test specimen thickness effect on fracture toughness in the transition temperature
region. Eng Fract Mech 2010;77(5):867–77.
[201] Molla-Abbasi K, Schutte H. On the full set of elastic T-stress terms of internal elliptical cracks under mixed-mode loading condition. Eng Fract Mech
2008;75(6):1545–68.
[202] Schutte H, Molla-Abbasi K. On the full set of elastic T-stress terms of internal circular cracks under mixed-mode loading conditions. Eng Fract Mech
2007;74(17):2770–87.
[203] Chen YZ. T stress in multiple crack problem for an infinite plate. Eng Fract Mech 1994;48(5):641–7.
[204] Chen YZ. Closed form solutions of T-stress in plane elasticity crack problems. Int J Solids Struct 2000:37.
[205] Zhao LG, Chen YH. T-stress of an interface macrocrack induced by near tip subinterface microcracks. Int J Fract 1998;90(3):275–85.
[206] Zhao LG, Chen YH. Effect of the T-stress in microcrack shielding problems. Journal of Applied Mechanics-Transactions of the Asme 1998;65(1):71–5.
[207] Jian-Jun H, Yi-Heng C. T-effect for the interaction problem of an interface macrocrack with a near-tip microvoid. Int J Fract 2000;102(3):205–22.
[208] Chen YH, Tian WY. A semi-infinite interface crack interacting with subinterface matrix cracks in dissimilar anisotropic materials. II. Numerical results
and discussion. Int J Solids Struct 2000;37(52):7731–42.
[209] Ma H, Wang B. T-stress in piezoelectric solid. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics-English Edition 2004;25(5):513–7.
[210] Pettit RG, Chen CS, Ingraffea AR, Hui CY. Process zone size effects on naturally curving cracks. Eng Fract Mech 2001;68(10):1181–205.
[211] Sumi Y, Nemat-Nasser S, Keer LM. On crack path stability in a finite body. Eng Fract Mech 1985;22(5):759–71.
[212] Xu Y, Keer LM. Non-planar deviation of an initially straight moving crack. Eng Fract Mech 1992;41(4):577–86.
[213] Xu Y, Keer LM. Crack curving in anisotropic elastic solids. Eng Fract Mech 1993;44(1):63–73.
[214] Li D-F, Li C-F, Qing H, Lu J. The elastic T-stress for slightly curved or kinked cracks. Int J Solids Struct 2010;47(14–15):1753–63.
[215] Huajian G, Cheng-Hsin C. Slightly curved or kinked cracks in anisotropic elastic solids. Int J Solids Struct 1992;29(8):947–72.
[216] AlFalou AA, Larralde H, Ball RC. Effect of T-stresses on the path of a three-dimensional crack propagating quasistatically under type I loading. Int J
Solids Struct 1997;34(5):569–80.
[217] Liebfried G. Verteilung von Versetzungen in statischen Gleichgewicht. Z Angew Phys 1951;130:214–26.
[218] Goldstei Rv, Salganik RL. Brittel-fracture of solids with arbitrary cracks. Int J Fract 1974;10(4):507–23.
[219] Selvarathinam AS, Goree JG. T-stress based fracture model for cracks in isotropic materials. Eng Fract Mech 1998;60(5–6):543–61.
[220] Wang TC, Stahle P. Stress state in front of a crack perpendicular to bimaterial interface. Eng Fract Mech 1998;59(4):471–85.
[221] Wang TC, Stahle P. A crack perpendicular to and terminating at a bimaterial interface. Acta Mech Sin 1998;14(1):27–36.
[222] Beltz GE, Fisher LL. Effect of T-stress on edge dislocation formation at a crack tip under Mode I loading. In: Chuang TJ, Rudnicki JW, editors. Multiscale
deformaiton and fracture in materials and structures. Boston: Kluwer; 2001. p. 237–42.
[223] Mroz KP, Dolinski K. The crack growth prediction in homogeneous materials and bimaterial systems. Zamm-Zeitschrift Fur Angewandte Mathematik
Und Mechanik 2010;90(9):721–44.
[224] Lo KK. Analysis of branched cracks. J Appl Mech 1978;45(4):797.
[225] Broberg KB. A note on <i>T</i>-stress determination using dislocation arrays. Int J Fract 2005;131(1):1–14.
[226] Zhu T, Yang W. Crack kinking in a piezoelectric solid. Int J Solids Struct 1999;36(33):5013–27.
[227] Wang YY, Parks DM. Evaluation of the elastic T-stress in surface-cracked plates using the line-spring method. Int J Fract 1992;56(1):25–40.
[228] Betegon C, Hancock JW. Two-parameter characterization of elastic-plastic crack-tip stress field. J Appl Mech 1991;58(1).
[229] Berg E, Skallerud B, Thaulow C. Two-parameter fracture mechanics and circumferential crack growth in surface cracked pipelines using line-spring
elements. Eng Fract Mech 2008;75(1):17–30.
[230] Jayadevan KR, Thaulow C, Ostby E, Berg E, Skallerud B, Holthe K, et al. Structural integrity of pipelines: T-stress by line-spring. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater
Struct 2005;28(5):467–88.
[231] Jayadevan KR, Berg E, Thaulow C, Ostby E, Skallerud B. Numerical investigation of ductile tearing in surface cracked pipes using line-springs. Int J
Solids Struct 2006;43(7–8):2378–97.
[232] Yang YY. Effect of the regular term on the stress field in a joint of dissimilar materials under remote mechanical load. Arch Appl Mech
1999;69(6):364–78.
[233] Cheng CZ, Recho N, Niu ZR. Influence of the non-singular stress on the crack extension and fatigue life. Nucl Eng Des 2012;248:293–300.
[234] Ma S, Zhang XB, Recho N, Li J. The mixed-mode investigation of the fatigue crack in CTS metallic specimen. Int J Fatigue 2006;28(12):1780–90.
[235] Guo W. Three-dimensional analyses of plastic constraint for through-thickness cracked bodies. Eng Fract Mech 1999;62(4–5):383–407.
[236] Hallstrom S, Grenestedt JL. Mixed mode fracture of cracks and wedge shaped notches in expanded PVC foam. Int J Fract 1998;88(4):343–58.
[237] Broberg KB. Influence of T-stress, cohesive strength and yield strength on the competition between decohesion and plastic flow in a crack edge
vicinity. Int J Fract 1999;100(2):133–42.
[238] Chen YZ. Evaluation of T-stresses in multiple crack problems of finite plate. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2012;35(2):173–84.
[239] Kirilyuk VS, Levchuk OI. Elastic T-stress solutions for flat elliptical cracks under tension and bending. Eng Fract Mech 2007;74(17):2881–91.
[240] Kirilyuk V, Levchuk OI. On all components of the elastic T-stress for embedded elliptical cracks under linearly varying loading. J Strain Anal Eng Des
2008;43(7):619–31.
[241] Zhao J, Guo W, She C. Three-parameter description of the stress field near the border of an embedded elliptical crack. Acta Mech 2007;190(1–
4):29–44.
[242] Zhao J, Guo W, She C. The in-plane and out-of-plane stress constraint factors and K-T-T-z description of stress fields near the border of a quarter-
elliptical corner crack. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2007;30(8):673–81.
[243] Zhao JH, Guo WL, She CM, Meng B. Three dimensional K-T-z stress fields around the embedded center elliptical crack front in elastic plates. Acta Mech
Sin 2006;22(2):148–55.
[244] Chen YZ, Lin XY. T-stress evaluation for curved crack problems. Acta Mech 2008;198(1–2):35–50.
[245] Chen YZ, Lin XY. Eigenfunction expansion variational method for stress intensity factor and T-stress evaluation of a circular cracked plate. Acta Mech
2008;196(1–2):55–73.
[246] Chen YZ, Lin XY, Wang ZX. T-stress evaluation for slightly curved crack using perturbation method. Int J Solids Struct 2008;45(1):211–24.
[247] Chen YZ, Wang ZX, Lin XY. Crack fron position and crack position techniques for evaluating the T-stress at crack tip using functions of a complex
variable. Journal of Mechanics of Materials and Structures 2008;3(9):1659–73.
[248] Chen YZ, Wang ZX, Lin XY. T-stress in the Zener-Stroh arc crack problem in plane elasticity. Eng Fract Mech 2008;75(16):4721–6.
[249] Chen YZ, Lin XY, Wang ZX. Perturbation method for the solution of a Zener-Stroh crack with a slightly curved configuration. Acta Mech 2009;203(1–
2):23–36.
[250] Chen YZ, Lin XY, Wang ZX. Evaluation of the stress intensity factors and the T-stress in periodic crack problem. Int J Fract 2009;156(2):203–16.
[251] Chen YZ, Lin XY, Wang ZX. An improved technique for the solution of edge crack problem for finite plate. Comput Mater Sci 2009;47(1):128–34.
[252] Chen YZ, Lin XY. Numerical solution for the T-stress in branch crack problem with infinitesimal branch length. Eng Fract Mech
2010;77(13):2593–600.
[253] Chen YZ, Lin XY. Closed form solutions of R-stress and stress singularity coefficient in rigid line problems. Acta Mech 2010;213(3–4):291–303.
[254] Chen YZ, Lin XY. Evaluation of the T-stress in branch crack problem. Int J Fract 2010;161(2):175–85.
[255] Chen YZ, Lin XY, Wang ZX. A rigorous derivation for T-stress in line crack problem. Eng Fract Mech 2010;77(4):753–7.
[256] Zhong XC, Li XF. T-stress analysis for a Griffith crack in a magnetoelectroelastic solid. Arch Appl Mech 2008;78(2):117–25.
[257] Li XF, Liu GL, Lee KY. Effects of T-stresses on fracture initiation for a closed crack in compression with frictional crack faces. Int J Fract
2009;160(1):19–30.
[258] Darban H, Haghpanahi M, Assadi A. Determination of crack tip parameters for ASCB specimen under mixed mode loading using finite element
method. Comput Mater Sci 2011;50(5):1667–74.
[259] Rice JR. Limitations to the small scale yielding approximation for crack tip plasticity. J Mech Phys Solids 1974;22(1):17–26.
[260] Ayatollahi MR, Pavier MJ, Smith DJ. Determination of T-stress from finite element analysis for mode I and mixed mode I/II loading. Int J Fract
1998;91(3):283–98.
[261] Wang X. Elastic T-stress for cracks in test specimens subjected to non-uniform stress distributions. Eng Fract Mech 2002:69.
[262] Tan CL, Wang X. The use of quarter-point crack-tip elements for T-stress determination in boundary element method analysis. Eng Fract Mech
2003;70(15):2247–52.
[263] Parameswaran V, Sharma S. Estimation of fracture parameters and stress field for edge cracks in finite elastically graded plates using boundary
collocation. Acta Mech 2006;184(1–4):159–70.
[264] Pettit RG, Newman JC, Domack MS. Crack turning damage tolerance approach for integrally stiffened structure. Sheffield: Engineering Materials
Advisory Services Ltd; 1997.
[265] Chen CS, Wawrzynek PA, Ingraffea AR. Prediction of residual strength and curvilinear crack growth in aircraft fuselages. Aiaa Journal
2002;40(8):1644–52.
[266] Becker TL, Cannon RM, Ritchie RO. Finite crack kinking and T-stresses in functionally graded materials. Int J Solids Struct 2001;38(32–33):5545–63.
[267] Alani AM, Hancock JW. J-DOMINANCE OF SHORT CRACKS IN TENSION AND BENDING. J Mech Phys Solids 1991;39(1):23–43.
[268] Leguillon D, Murer S. Crack deflection in a biaxial stress state. Int J Fract 2008;150(1):75–90.
[269] Zafosnik B, Ren Z, Flasker J, Mishuris G. Modelling of surface crack growth under lubricated rolling-sliding contact loading. Int J Fract
2005;134(2):127–49.
[270] Pehan S, Kramberger J, Flasker J, Zafosnik B. Investigation of crack propagation scatter in a gear tooth’s root. Eng Fract Mech 2008;75(5):1266–83.
[271] Jayadevan KR, Narasimhan R, Ramamurthy TS, Dattaguru B. The effect of T-stress on plane strain dynamic crack growth in elastic-plastic materials.
[272] Su RKL, Sun HY. A brief note on elastic T-stress for centred crack in anisotropic plate. Int J Fract 2005;131(1):53–8.
[273] Shim DJ, Paulino GH, Dodds RH. A boundary layer framework considering material gradation effects. Eng Fract Mech 2006;73(5):593–615.
[274] Shim DJ, Paulino GH, Dodds RH. J resistance behavior in functionally graded materials using cohesive zone and modified boundary layer models. Int J
Fract 2006;139(1):91–117.
[275] Kim JH, Kc A. A generalized interaction integral method for the evaluation of the T-stress in orthotropic functionally graded materials under thermal
loading. Journal of Applied Mechanics-Transactions of the Asme. 2008;75(5).
[276] Amit KC, Kim JH. Interaction integrals for thermal fracture of functionally graded materials. Eng Fract Mech 2008;75(8):2542–65.
[277] Zhang SC. Stress intensity factors for spot welds joining sheets of unequal thickness. Int J Fract 2003;122(1–2):L119–24.
[278] Zhang SC. T-stress and stress intensities for the interface cracks in some specimen-relevant geometries. Int J Fract 2001;111(2):L23–8.
[279] Radaj D, Zhang S. Stress intensity factors for spot welds between plates of unequal thickness. Eng Fract Mech 1991;39(2):391–413.
[280] Lugo M, Daniewicz SR. The influence of T-stress on plasticity induced crack closure under plane strain conditions. Int J Fatigue 2011;33(2):176–85.
[281] Lee H, Kim YJ. Interfacial crack-tip constraints and J-integrals in plastically mismatched bi-materials. Eng Fract Mech 2001;68(8):1013–31.
[282] Kim J-H, Paulino GH. T-stress, mixed-mode stress intensity factors, and crack initiation angles in functionally graded materials: a unified approach
using the interaction integral method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 2003;192(11–12):1463–94.
[283] Chen B, Dillard DA. Numerical analysis of directionally unstable crack propagation in adhesively bonded joints. Int J Solids Struct 2001;38(38–
39):6907–24.
[284] Chen B, Dillard DA. The effect of the T-stress on crack path selection in adhesively bonded joints. Int J Adhes Adhes 2001;21(5):357–68.
[285] Chen B, Dillard DA, Dillard JG, Clark RL. Crack path selection in adhesively-bonded joints: The role of material properties. J Adhes 2001;75(4):405–34.
[286] Chen B, Dillard DA, Dillard JG, Clark RL. Crack path selection in adhesively bonded joints: the roles of external loads and speciment geometry. Int J
Fract 2002;114(2):167–90.
[287] Suo Z, Bao G, Fan B, Wang TC. Orthotropy rescaling and implications for fracture in composites. Int J Solids Struct 1991;28(2):235–48.
[288] Du ZZ, Hancock JW. The effect of non-singular stresses on crack-tip constraint. J Mech Phys Solids 1991;39(4):555–67.
[289] Shih CF, o’Dowd NP, Kirk MT. A framework for quantifying crack tip constraint. ASTM Symposium on Constraint Effects in Fracture. American Society
for Testing and Materials, Indianapolis, 1991.
[290] Jayadevan KR, Narasimhan R, Ramamurthy TS, Dattaguru B. Effect of T-stress and loading rate on crack initiation in rate sensitive plastic materials. Int
J Solids Struct 2002;39(7):1757–75.
[291] Solanki K, Daniewicz SR, Newman JC. Finite element modeling of plasticity-induced crack closure with emphasis on geometry and mesh refinement
effects. Eng Fract Mech 2003;70(12):1475–89.
[292] Solanki K, Daniewicz SR, Newman JC. Finite element analysis of plasticity-induced fatigue crack closure: an overview. Eng Fract Mech
2004;71(2):149–71.
[293] Roychowdhury S, Dodds RH. Effects of an overload event on crack closure in 3-D small-scale yielding: finite element studies. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater
Struct 2005;28(10):891–907.
[294] Roychowdhury S, Dodds Jr RH. Effect of T-stress on fatigue crack closure in 3-D small-scale yielding. Int J Solids Struct 2004;41(9–10):2581–606.
[295] Roychowdhury S, Dodds RH. Three-dimensional effects on fatigue crack closure in the small-scale yielding regime - a finite element study. Fatigue
Fract Eng Mater Struct 2003;26(8):663–73.
[296] Varias AG, Massih AR. Temperature and constraint effects on hydride fracture in zirconium alloys. Eng Fract Mech 2000;65(1):29–54.
[297] Tong J. T-stress and its implications for crack growth. Eng Fract Mech 2002;69.
[298] Petti JP, Dodds RH. Ductile tearing and discrete void effects on cleavage fracture under small-scale yielding conditions. Int J Solids Struct
2005;42(13):3655–76.
[299] Dhirendra VK, Narasimhan R. Mixed-mode steady-state crack growth in elastic-plastic solids. Eng Fract Mech 1998;59(4):543–59.
[300] Kim J, Gao XS, Srivatsan TS. Modeling of crack growth in ductile solids: a three-dimensional analysis. Int J Solids Struct 2003;40(26):7357–74.
[301] Subramanya HY, Viswanath S, Narasimhan R. Influence of crack tip constraint on void growth in pressure sensitive plastic solids - I: 2D analysis. Eng
Fract Mech 2008;75(5):1045–63.
[302] Betegon C, Rodriguez C, Belzunce FJ. Analysis and modelisation of short crack growth by ductile fracture micromechanisms. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater
Struct 1997;20(5):633–44.
[303] Roychowdhury S, Roy YD, Dodds RH. Ductile tearing in thin aluminum panels: experiments and analyses using large-displacement, 3-D surface
cohesive elements. Eng Fract Mech 2002;69(8):983–1002.
[304] Sobotka JC, Dodds Jr RH. T-stress effects on steady crack growth in a thin, ductile plate under small-scale yielding conditions: Three-dimensional
modeling. Eng Fract Mech 2011;78(6):1182–200.
[305] Sobotka JC, Dodds RH. Steady crack growth in a thin, ductile plate under small-scale yielding conditions: Three-dimensional modeling. Eng Fract
Mech 2011;78(2):343–63.
[306] Carlyle AG, Dodds RH. Three-dimensional effects on fatigue crack closure under fully-reversed loading. Eng Fract Mech 2007;74(3):457–66.
[307] Jogdand PV, Murthy K. A finite element based interior collocation method for the computation of stress intensity factors and T-stresses. Eng Fract
Mech 2010;77(7):1116–27.
[308] Chen CH, Wang CL. Stress intensity factors and T-stresses for offset double edge-cracked plates under mixed-mode loadings. Int J Fract
2008;152(2):149–62.
[309] Wang X. Two-parameter characterization of elastic-plastic crack front fields: Surface cracked plates under tensile loading. Eng Fract Mech
2009;76(7):958–82.
[310] Sherry AH, Hooton DG, Beardsmore DW, Lidbury DPG. Material constraint parameters for the assessment of shallow defects in structural components.
Part II: Constraint-based assessment of shallow defects. Eng Fract Mech 2005;72(15):2396–415.
[311] Sherry AH, Wilkes MA, Beardsmore DW, Lidbury DPG. Material constraint parameters for the assessment of shallow defects in structural components
- Part I: Parameter solutions. Eng Fract Mech 2005;72(15):2373–95.
[312] Varias AG, Shih CF. Quasi-static crack advance under a range of constraints—Steady-state fields based on a characteristic length. J Mech Phys Solids
1993;41(5):835–61.
[313] Chen C, Fleck NA, Lu TJ. The mode I crack growth resistance of metallic foams. J Mech Phys Solids 2001;49(2):231–59.
[314] Galatenko GV. Two-parameter failure criterion for elastoplastic bodies with mode I cracks. International Applied Mechanics 2007;43(7):745–53.
[315] Kaminskii AA, Galatenko GV. Two-parameter model of a mode I crack in an elastoplastic body under plane-strain conditions. International Applied
Mechanics 2005;41(6):621–30.
[316] Sugimura Y, Lim PG, Shih CF, Suresh S. Fracture normal to a bimaterial interface: Effects of plasticity on crack-tip shielding and amplification. Acta
Metall Mater 1995;43(3):1157–69.
[317] Ben-Aoun ZEA, Pan J. Influences of non-singular stresses on plane-stress near-tip fields for pressure-sensitive materials and applications to
transformation toughened ceramics. Int J Fract 1996;77(3):223–41.
[318] Kang K-J, Beom HG. Plastic zone size near the crack tip in a constrained ductile layer under mixed mode loading. Eng Fract Mech 2000;66(3):257–68.
[319] Wei Y. Constraint effects on the elastic-plastic fracture behaviour in strain gradient solids. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2002;25(5):433–44.
[320] Wang X. Two-parameter characterization of elastic-plastic crack front fields: Surface cracked plates under uniaxial and biaxial bending. Eng Fract
Mech 2012;96:122–46.
[321] Martin JT, Lambert SB. Analysis of constraint in single edge notch tension specimens using the T-stress. Int J Press Vessels Pip 1996;65(1):13–9.
[322] Andrews RM, Garwood SJ. An analysis of fracture under biaxial loading using the non-singular T-stress. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct
2001;24(1):53–62.
[323] Meliani MH, Azari Z, Pluvinage G, Capelle J. Gouge assessment for pipes and associated transferability problem. Eng Fail Anal 2010;17(5):1117–26.
[324] Meliani MH, Matvienko YG, Pluvinage G. Two-parameter fracture criterion (K rho, c-Tef, c) based on notch fracture mechanics. Int J Fract
2011;167(2):173–82.
[325] Burstow MC, Howard IC. Predicting the effects of crack tip constraint on material resistance curves using ductile damage theory. Fatigue Fract Eng
Mater Struct 1996;19(4):461–74.
[326] Burstow MC, Howard IC, Ainsworth RA. The effects of material strength mismatching on constraint at the limit load of welded three-point bend
specimens. Int J Fract 1998;89(2):117–42.
[327] Burstow MC, Howard IC, Ainsworth RA. The influence of constraint on crack tip stress fields in strength mismatched welded joints. J Mech Phys Solids
1998;46(5):845–72.
[328] Burstow MC, Howard IC. Damage mechanics models of ductile crack growth in welded specimens. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct
2000;23(8):691–708.
[329] Karstensen AD, Nekkal A, Hancock JW. The constraint of elastic-plastic crack tip fields. in: 9th International conference in fracture (ICF9). Sydney,
Australia, 1997.
[330] Roy YA, Narasimhan R. Constraint effects on ductile fracture processes near a notch tip under mixed-mode loading. Eng Fract Mech
1999;62(6):511–34.
[331] Roy YA, Narasimhan R. J-Dominance in mixed mode ductile fracture specimens. Int J Fract 1998;88(3):259–79.
[332] Kim DH, Kang KJ. Two parameter approach for elastic-plastic fracture of short cracked specimens under mixed mode loading. Int J Fract
2002;116(3):245–73.
[333] Betegon C, Belzunce FJ, Rodriguez C. A two parameter fracture criterion for high strength low carbon steel. Acta Mater 1996;44(3):1055–61.
[334] Ren XB, Zhang ZL, Nyhus B. Effect of residual stress on cleavage fracture toughness by using cohesive zone model. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct
2011;34(8):592–603.
[335] Ren XB, Zhang ZL, Nyhus B. Effect of residual stresses on ductile crack growth resistance. Eng Fract Mech 2010;77(8):1325–37.
[336] Ren XB, Zhang ZL, Nyhus B. Effect of residual stresses on the crack-tip constraint in a modified boundary layer model. Int J Solids Struct
2009;46(13):2629–41.
[337] Cheung S, Luxmoore AR. A finite element analysis of stable crack growth in an aluminium alloy. Eng Fract Mech 2003;70(9):1153–69.
[338] Cui YQ, Zhong Z. Nonuniform ferroelastic domain switching driven by two-parameter crack tip stress field. Eng Fract Mech 2012;96:226–40.
[339] Odowd NP, Sumpter JDG. Effect of thermomechanical loading on near tip constraint. J Phys IV 1996;6(C6):539–48.
[340] Tvergaard V. Effect of T-stress on crack growth under mixed mode I-III loading. Int J Solids Struct 2008;45(18–19):5181–8.
[341] Tvergaard V. Effect of pure mode I, II or III loading or mode mixity on crack growth in a homogeneous solid. Int J Solids Struct 2010;47(11–
12):1611–7.
[342] Tvergaard V. Effect of T-stress on the cleavage crack growth resistance resulting from plastic flow. J Phys IV 1998;8(P8):391–8.
[343] Patil SD, Narasimhan R, Mishra RK. A numerical study of crack tip constraint in ductile single crystals. J Mech Phys Solids 2008;56(6):2265–86.
[344] Patil SD, Narasimhan R, Mishra RK. Effect of lattice orientation on crack tip constraint in ductile single crystals. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct
2011;34(8):604–18.
[345] Biswas P, Narasimhan R. Effect of loading rate on crack tip fields in three point bend fracture specimen of FCC single crystal. Int J Solids Struct 2002.
[346] Biswas P, Narasimhan R, Tewari A. Influence of crack tip constraint on void growth in ductile FCC single crystals. Mater Sci Engng a-Struct Mater Prop
Microstruct Process 2011;528(3):823–31.
[347] Beltz GE, Machova A. Effect of T-stress on dislocation emission in iron. Scripta Mater 2004;50(4):483–7.
[348] Beltz GE, Machova A. Reconciliation of continuum and atomistic models for the ductile versus brittle response of iron. Modell Simul Mater Sci Eng
2007;15(2):65–83.
[349] Vatne IR, Ostby E, Thaulow C, Farkas D. Quasicontinuum simulation of crack propagation in bcc-Fe. Mater Sci Engng a-Struct Mater Prop Microstruct
Process 2011;528(15):5122–34.
[350] Ersland CH, Thaulow C, Vatne IR, Ostby E. Atomistic modeling of micromechanisms and T-stress effects in fracture of iron. Eng Fract Mech
2012;79:180–90.
[351] Castro JTP, Sousa RA, Lopes AAO. Comparing improved crack tip plastic zone estimates considering corrections based on T-stress and on complete
stress fields. First IJFatigue, and FFEMS Joint Workshop – Characterisation of crack tip stress fields, Forni de Sopra, Italy; 2011.
[352] Sousa RA, Castro JTP, Lopes AAO, Martha LF. On improved crack tip plastic zone estimates based on T-stress and on complete stress fields. Fatigue
Fract Eng Mater Struct 2012. p. no-no.
[353] Yeh H-Y, Ahmed K. Change of damage zone size by T-stress. J Reinf Plast Compos 2006;25(6):645.
[354] Hello G, Ben Tahar M, Roelandt J-M. Analytical determination of coefficients in crack-tip stress expansions for a finite crack in an infinite plane
medium. Int J Solids Struct 2012;49(3–4):556–66.
[355] Li Xian-Fang XLR. T-stresses across Static Crack Kinking. J Appl Mech 2007;74:181–90.
[356] Li X-F, Liu G-L, Lee K. Effects of T-stresses on fracture initiation for a closed crack in compression with frictional crack faces. Int J Fract
2009;160(1):19–30.
[357] Eftis J. Load biaxiality and fracture – a 2-sided history of complementing errors. Eng Fract Mech 1987;26(4):567–92.
[358] Berry JP. Determination of fracture surface energies by cleavage technique. J Appl Phys 1963;34(1):62.
[359] Benbow JJ, Roesler FC. Experiments on controlled fractures. Proc Phys Soc London Section B 1957;70(2). p. 201-&.
[360] Pook LP. An alternative crack path stability parameter. Sheffield: Engineering Materials Advisory Services Ltd.; 1998.
[361] Haefele PM, Lee JD. The constant stress term. Eng Fract Mech 1995;50(5–6):869–82.
[362] Eftis, Liebowitz. On the modified westergaard equations for certain plane crack problems, NASA-CR-112817, George Washington University; 1972.
[363] Hallback N, Nilsson F. Mixed-mode I/II fracture-behavior of an aluminium-alloy. J Mech Phys Solids 1994;42(9):1345.
[364] Li XF, Lee KY. Crack growth in a piezoelectric material with a Griffith crack perpendicular to the poling axis. Phil Mag 2004;84(18):1789–820.

A Review of T-Stress and Its Effects in Fracture Mechanics

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

A Review of T-Stress and Its Effects in Fracture Mechanics

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Engineering Fracture Mechanics 134 (2015) 218–241

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Fracture Mechanics

A review of T-stress and its effects in fracture mechanics

4.10. T-stress solutions for particular cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228

2. The origin of T-stress

Fig. 1. Crack tip parameters.

3. Experimental studies on T-stress

3.1. Photoelastic tests on T-stress

3.1.1. Principle of the photoelastic tests

Fig. 3. Sanford’s [21] experimental results.

3.2. Crack paths with T-stress

3.3. Fracture toughness with T-stress: constraint parameter

4. Analytical studies to evaluate T-stress

4.1. Weight function technique

4.2. Eigen series expansion

4.3. Integral equation technique

4.3.1. Eshelby J-integral method

4.3.2. Interaction integral in functionally graded, dissimilar and anisotropic materials

4.3.3. Interaction integral in bi-materials and adhesives

4.3.4. Interaction integral in mixed-mode cracks

4.4. Method of superposition

4.5. Perturbation technique

4.6. Dislocation array technique

4.7. Line spring method

4.8. Stress difference method

4.9. Other methods

4.10. T-stress solutions for particular cases

4.11. Asymmetric semicircular bend specimen

5. Finite element studies in T-stress

5.1. FEM for T-stress for specimen geometries

5.4. FEM and plastic zone size

5.5. FEM studies for J-integral and T-stress

5.6. Thermal and residual stress effects with T-stress

6. Other studies for T-stress

7. The role of T-stress in Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics: a discussion

7.1. T-stress: a correction to the Westergaards biaxial stress ﬁeld

7.2. The origin of T-stress crack path prediction—a retake

Fig. 5. Various zones at the crack tip.

7.3. Plastic zone and T-stress

(a) (b) (c)

7.4. Mechanism of crack tip constraint with T-stress

In T-stress studies on piezoelectric and pressure-sensitive materials [146,209,226,301,317,364], it was shown to be

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi