Cracks Jacques Besson

Similar documents
Elastic-Plastic Fracture Mechanics. Professor S. Suresh

Treatment of Constraint in Non-Linear Fracture Mechanics

Lecture #7: Basic Notions of Fracture Mechanics Ductile Fracture

Topics in Ship Structures

Crack Tip Plastic Zone under Mode I Loading and the Non-singular T zz -stress

MMJ1133 FATIGUE AND FRACTURE MECHANICS E ENGINEERING FRACTURE MECHANICS

Fracture Mechanics, Damage and Fatigue Non Linear Fracture Mechanics: J-Integral

Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics

Non-linear fracture mechanics in LS-DYNA and LS-PrePost

Characterization of crack-tip field and constraint for bending specimens under large-scale yielding

Fracture mechanics fundamentals. Stress at a notch Stress at a crack Stress intensity factors Fracture mechanics based design

Introduction to Fracture

Critical applied stresses for a crack initiation from a sharp V-notch

Lecture 8. Stress Strain in Multi-dimension

Fig. 1. Different locus of failure and crack trajectories observed in mode I testing of adhesively bonded double cantilever beam (DCB) specimens.

2.2 Fracture Mechanics Fundamentals

Mechanics of Earthquakes and Faulting

INCREASING RUPTURE PREDICTABILITY FOR ALUMINUM

Tentamen/Examination TMHL61

Constraint effects on crack-tip fields in elasticperfectly

G1RT-CT A. BASIC CONCEPTS F. GUTIÉRREZ-SOLANA S. CICERO J.A. ALVAREZ R. LACALLE W P 6: TRAINING & EDUCATION

Experimentally Calibrating Cohesive Zone Models for Structural Automotive Adhesives

ME 535 Project Report Numerical Computation of Plastic Zone Shapes in Fracture Mechanics. V.V.H. Aditya ( ) Rishi Pahuja ( ) June 9, 2014

Homework Problems. ( σ 11 + σ 22 ) 2. cos (θ /2), ( σ θθ σ rr ) 2. ( σ 22 σ 11 ) 2

MECHANICS OF 2D MATERIALS

A fracture parameter for welded structures with residual stresses

After lecture 16 you should be able to

Bone Tissue Mechanics

FCP Short Course. Ductile and Brittle Fracture. Stephen D. Downing. Mechanical Science and Engineering

Stress intensity factors under combined tension and torsion loadings

3 2 6 Solve the initial value problem u ( t) 3. a- If A has eigenvalues λ =, λ = 1 and corresponding eigenvectors 1

Studies on the affect of Stress Triaxiality on Strain Energy Density, and CTOD under Plane Stress Condition Subjected to Mixed Mode (I/II) Fracture

Mechanical Properties of Materials

Multiaxial Fatigue. Professor Darrell F. Socie. Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Introduction to fracture mechanics

Mechanics PhD Preliminary Spring 2017

Fatigue and Fracture

FRACTURE OF CRACKED MEMBERS 1. The presence of a crack in a structure may weaken it so that it fails by fracturing in two or more pieces.

Available online at ScienceDirect. 20th European Conference on Fracture (ECF20) Yu.G. Matvienko*

PROPAGATION OF CURVED CRACKS IN HOMOGENEOUS AND GRADED MATERIALS

IMECE CRACK TUNNELING: EFFECT OF STRESS CONSTRAINT

On the Path-Dependence of the J-Integral Near a Stationary Crack in an Elastic-Plastic Material

Fracture Mechanics, Damage and Fatigue Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics - Energetic Approach

Weibull stress solutions for 2-D cracks in elastic and elastic-plastic materials

INFLUENCE OF THE LOCATION AND CRACK ANGLE ON THE MAGNITUDE OF STRESS INTENSITY FACTORS MODE I AND II UNDER UNIAXIAL TENSION STRESSES

Efficient 2-parameter fracture assessments of cracked shell structures

Identification of the plastic zone using digital image correlation

Mechanics of Earthquakes and Faulting

Size effect in the strength of concrete structures

Finite Element Method in Geotechnical Engineering

Thermal load-induced notch stress intensity factors derived from averaged strain energy density

Outline. Tensile-Test Specimen and Machine. Stress-Strain Curve. Review of Mechanical Properties. Mechanical Behaviour

DEVELOPMENT OF TEST GUIDANCE FOR COMPACT TENSION FRACTURE TOUGHNESS SPECIMENS CONTAINING NOTCHES INSTEAD OF FATIGUE PRE-CRACKS

A modified quarter point element for fracture analysis of cracks

CALCULATION OF FRACTURE MECHANICS PARAMETERS FOR AN ARBITRARY THREE-DIMENSIONAL CRACK, BY THE EQUIVALENT DOMAIN INTEGRAL METHOD 1

By drawing Mohr s circle, the stress transformation in 2-D can be done graphically. + σ x σ y. cos 2θ + τ xy sin 2θ, (1) sin 2θ + τ xy cos 2θ.

EMA 3702 Mechanics & Materials Science (Mechanics of Materials) Chapter 2 Stress & Strain - Axial Loading

Stress Concentration. Professor Darrell F. Socie Darrell Socie, All Rights Reserved

Influence of impact velocity on transition time for V-notched Charpy specimen*

SKIN-STRINGER DEBONDING AND DELAMINATION ANALYSIS IN COMPOSITE STIFFENED SHELLS

Chapter 7. Highlights:

Transactions on Engineering Sciences vol 6, 1994 WIT Press, ISSN

Stress intensity factor analysis for an interface crack between dissimilar isotropic materials

FRACTURE MECHANICS FOR MEMBRANES

Engineering Fracture Mechanics

PEAT SEISMOLOGY Lecture 2: Continuum mechanics

UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN ME MECHANICS OF MATERIALS I FINAL EXAM DECEMBER 13, 2008 Professor A. Dolovich

Lecture #8: Ductile Fracture (Theory & Experiments)

* Many components have multiaxial loads, and some of those have multiaxial loading in critical locations

Stress, Strain, Mohr s Circle

Mathematical Relations Related to the Lode. Parameter for Studies of Ductility

Fracture mechanics. code_aster, salome_meca course material GNU FDL licence (

International Journal of Solids and Structures

NUMERICAL MODELING OF CRACK PATH PROPAGATION DEPENDING ON STEEL RATIO IN RC BEAMS LECTURE NOTES IRINA KERELEZOVA

The Finite Element Method for the Analysis of Non-Linear and Dynamic Systems

A short review of continuum mechanics

Failure modes of glass panels subjected to soft missile impact

TOUGHNESS OF PLASTICALLY-DEFORMING ASYMMETRIC JOINTS. Ford Research Laboratory, Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, MI 48121, U.S.A. 1.

Material parameter identification for the numerical simulation of deep-drawing drawing of aluminium alloys

Multiscale analyses of the behaviour and damage of composite materials

Stress concentrations, fracture and fatigue

IMPROVED ESTIMATES OF PLASTIC ZONES AROUND CRACK TIPS PART 1: THE EFFECTS OF THE T-STRESSES AND OF THE WESTERGAARD STRESS FUNCTION

V Predicted Weldment Fatigue Behavior AM 11/03 1

Mechanics of Earthquakes and Faulting

SEMM Mechanics PhD Preliminary Exam Spring Consider a two-dimensional rigid motion, whose displacement field is given by

Fundamentals of Linear Elasticity

Module-4. Mechanical Properties of Metals

COMPARISON OF COHESIVE ZONE MODELS USED TO PREDICT DELAMINATION INITIATED FROM FREE-EDGES : VALIDATION AGAINST EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Dr. D. Dinev, Department of Structural Mechanics, UACEG

Common pitfalls while using FEM

NONLINEAR CONTINUUM FORMULATIONS CONTENTS

Plasticity R. Chandramouli Associate Dean-Research SASTRA University, Thanjavur

Basic studies of ductile failure processes and implications for fracture prediction

Variational phase field model for dynamic brittle fracture

J-T AND J-Q CHARACTERIZATION OF SURFACE CRACK TIP FIELDS IN METALLIC LINERS UNDER LARGE-SCALE YIELDING

A MECHANISM FOR DUCTILE FRACTURE IN SHEAR. Viggo Tvergaard Department of Mechanical Engineering,

Toughening due to domain switching in single crystal ferroelectric materials

Mechanics of Earthquakes and Faulting

3D Elasticity Theory

Continuum Mechanics. Continuum Mechanics and Constitutive Equations

Transcription:

Jacques Besson Centre des Matériaux UMR 7633 Mines ParisTech PSL Research University Institut Mines Télécom Aγνωστ oς Θεoς

Outline 1 Some definitions 2 in a linear elastic material 3 in a plastic material 4 Fracture criteria 5 Evaluation of fracture parameters: K, T, J, Q 2/60

Part I Some definitions 3/60

Small scale yielding Large scale yielding F large scale yielding small scale yielding u 4/60

Some specimen types CT / Compact tension 5/60

SENB / Single Edge Nocthed Bending 6/60

SENT / Single Edge Notched Tensile 7/60

CCP / Center Crack Panel 8/60

Part II in a linear elastic material 9/60

in a linear elastic isotropic material Geometry y M n z r θ crack T = σ. n = 0 x Material properties E ν 10/60

Crack opening modes mode I mode II mode III opening in-plane shear out-of-plane shear 11/60

Stresses Solution obtained using complex Airy s function Stresses vary asi (first term of a Taylor expansion): σ ij = K X 2πr σ X ij (θ), X = I, II, III K X : stress intensity factor (MPa m) lim r 0 σ ij = Energy is bounded e = σ ij εij = ẽ(θ)/r E = L erdrdθ = L 0 0 ẽ(θ)drdθ < 12/60

Stress field σ xx = σ yy = σ xy = K I cos θ ( 1 sin θ 3θ sin 2πr 2 2 2 K I cos θ ( 1 + sin θ 3θ sin 2πr 2 2 2 ) K I cos θ 2πr 2 sin θ 3θ cos 2 2 + K II cos θ 2πr 2 σ xz = K III 2πr sin θ 2 K II sin θ ( 2 + cos θ ) 3θ cos 2πr 2 2 2 ) + K II sin θ 2πr 2 cos θ 3θ cos 2 2 ) ( 1 sin θ 3θ sin 2 2 σ yz = σ zz = K III cos θ 2πr 2 { ν(σ xx + σ yy) plane strain 0 plane stress 13/60

Displacements Displacemens vary as: u i = K X r 2π ũx (θ), X = I, II, III u x = K I r 2µ 2π cos θ 2 u y = K I r 2µ 2π sin θ 2 u z = 2 K III r µ 2π sin θ 2 κ = ( κ 1 + 2 sin 2 θ 2 ( κ + 1 2 cos 2 θ 2 { 3 4ν plane strain (3 ν)/(1 + ν) plane stress ) + K II 2µ ) K II 2µ r 2π sin θ 2 r 2π cos θ 2 ( κ + 1 + 2 cos 2 θ 2 ( κ 1 2 sin 2 θ 2 ) ) 14/60

Energy release rate G F 1/S(a) GBda 1/S(a + da) u Determination of the the energy release rate (A = Ba) G = W A = 1 2 F 2 S A 15/60

Energy release rate and stress intensity factor (mode I) Small crack advance a σ yy y w = 1 2 σ yyu y σ θ=0 yy 1/ x u y x a u θ=π y a x x x = 0... a 16/60

Work of separation dw : Released energy with and so that Mixed mode case dw = wdx = 1 2 σyyuydx = K I 2 2µ a x I = x G a = a 0 κ + 1 a x dx 2π x wdx dx = x( a x) + a 2 arcsin I(x = a) I(x = 0) = π 2 a G = K I 2 (κ + 1) = 8µ KI 2 (1 ν 2 ) E K 2 I E plane strain plane stress G = (K I 2 + KII 2 )(1 ν 2 ) + 1 + ν E E K III 2 ( ) 2x a a 17/60

Plastic zone size Small scale yielding Calculation of the von Mises stress σ eq = K cos 2 (θ/2) (4 4ν + 4ν 2 3 cos 2 (θ/2)) = K σ eq(θ, ν) 2πr 2πr for ν = 0 or plane stress for ν = 1 2 R p(θ = 0) = 1 ( ) 2 K 2π σ 0 R p(θ = 0) = 0 18/60

Iso-values: σ eq = σ 0 for ν = 0., 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 πyσ 2 0/K 2 I 0 0.2 crack 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 πxσ 2 0/K 2 I 19/60

Irwin s correction Restore equilibrium when plasticity occurs σ yy σ 0 X x 20/60

Equilibrium With the condition after some maths 0 K 2πx dx = R 0 K σ 0 dx + dx R 2π(x + X) K 2π(R + X) = σ 0 X = 1 ( ) 2 K R = 1 ( ) 2 K = 2R p 2π σ 0 π σ 0 Plane strain case R 1 ( ) 2 K 3π σ 0 21/60

Validity of the toughness measurement tests according to ASTM E399 from the E399 ASTM standard so that (i.e. small scale yielding) ( ) 2 K 2.5 25R PE σ 0 R W a 22/60

FE evaluation of the plastic zone size Specific mesh ; loading using the K field solution ux = K r 2µ 2π cos θ 2 uy = K r 2µ 2π sin θ 2 ( k 1 + 2 sin 2 θ ) 2 ( k + 1 2 cos 2 θ ) 2 3 4ν plane strain k = 3 ν 1 + ν plane stress ρ J ρoy (x, y) θ Ox crack tip region L R p 23/60

Calculation for a hardening exponent equal to N = 10 ε = σ 0 E ( σ σ 0 ) N ε p < 0.2% Plane strain Plane stress 24/60

T stress Taylor expansion σ ij = K X 2πr σ ij (θ) + T δ i1 δ 1j + O(r 1/2 ) The T stress depends on the geometry of the specimens Non-dimensionnal parameter πat β = K I 25/60

Effect of the T stress of the plastic zone plastic zone for a fixed K I and various T /σ 0 values T/σ0 = +0.3 T/σ0 = +0.6 T/σ0 = 0 T/σ0 = 0.3 T/σ0 = 0.6 26/60

Part III in a plastic material 27/60

J integral Contour integral which does not depend on the contour Γ ( J = wdx 2 T. u ) x ds where Γ w = σ ij dε ij ds T = σ. n n x 2 crack Γ x 1 28/60

Proof that the J-integral is path independent (1/2) First prove that J = 0 over a closed path (Γ) ( J = wdx 2 T. u ) ( ) ( ) u k u k ds = wn 1 n j σ jk ds = wδ 1j σ jk n j ds Γ x 1 Γ x 1 Γ x 1 Using the divergence theorem: f j n j ds = J = A ( wδ 1j σ jk x j u k x Γ ) da = A A f j x j da ( w σ kj u k σ kj x 1 x j x 1 2 u k x 1 x j ) da since σ kj / x j = 0 (equilibrium σ = 0) and 2 u k / x 1 x j = ε kj / x 1 ( ) w ε kj J = σ kj da x 1 x 1 however σ kj = w/ ε kj so that σ kj ε kj x 1 A = w ε kj ε kj x 1 = w x 1 J = 0 29/60

Proof that the J-integral is path independent (2/2) Consider the following closed path Γ = Γ 1 Γ + Γ 2 Γ Γ + Γ Γ 2 Γ 1 x 2 x 1 One has (see above) 0 = J 1 + J + J 2 J so that J 1 = J 2 for any Γ 1 and Γ 2 which proves the path-independence. 30/60

Energy release rate Nonlinear material F a a + da JBda J = 1 B du da U = Pdu u 31/60

The HRR field HRR = Hutchinson+Rice+Rosengren (1968) Non linear material Small strain analysis Mode I crack ( ) N ε σ = ε 0 σ 0 32/60

Form of the HRR field for stresses ( J σ ij = σ 0 σ 0 ε 0 I N r Form of the HRR field for deformations Displacements N = 1 linear elastic case ( J ε ij = ε 0 σ 0 ε 0 I N r ( J u i = ε 0 σ 0 ε 0 I N r ) 1 N + 1 σij (θ, N) ) N N + 1 εij (θ, N) ) N N + 1 r 1 N + 1 ũ i (θ, N) 33/60

No analytical forms for σ ij (θ, N), ε ij (θ, N) and ũ i (θ, N) σ ij, ε ij and ũ i (θ, N) are obtained numerically Tables # n=10 In=4.54041 # theta Seq Srr Stt Srt Err Ett Ert Ur Ut 0. 0.66908 1.72433 2.49692-0.00000-0.01557 0.01557-0.00000-0.17129 0.00000 1. 0.66913 1.72469 2.49665 0.01622-0.01557 0.01557 0.00065-0.17125 0.00326 2. 0.66926 1.72576 2.49584 0.03241-0.01556 0.01556 0.00131-0.17114 0.00652 3. 0.66949 1.72756 2.49449 0.04857-0.01554 0.01554 0.00197-0.17096 0.00978 4. 0.66980 1.73007 2.49260 0.06466-0.01552 0.01552 0.00263-0.17069 0.01303 5. 0.67021 1.73330 2.49018 0.08067-0.01549 0.01549 0.00330-0.17036 0.01628 6. 0.67071 1.73723 2.48723 0.09657-0.01545 0.01545 0.00398-0.16995 0.01952 7. 0.67131 1.74187 2.48375 0.11236-0.01541 0.01541 0.00467-0.16946 0.02275 8. 0.67201 1.74722 2.47974 0.12799-0.01535 0.01535 0.00537-0.16890 0.02597 9. 0.67281 1.75325 2.47522 0.14346-0.01530 0.01530 0.00608-0.16826 0.02918 10. 0.67372 1.75998 2.47018 0.15875-0.01523 0.01523 0.00681-0.16755 0.03238 11. 0.67474 1.76739 2.46464 0.17383-0.01516 0.01516 0.00756-0.16676 0.03556 12. 0.67589 1.77546 2.45860 0.18869-0.01508 0.01508 0.00833-0.16590 0.03873 13. 0.67716 1.78420 2.45207 0.20331-0.01500 0.01500 0.00913-0.16495 0.04187 14. 0.67856 1.79358 2.44505 0.21766-0.01490 0.01490 0.00996-0.16393 0.04501 15. 0.68011 1.80359 2.43757 0.23174-0.01480 0.01480 0.01082-0.16283 0.04812 16. 0.68181 1.81422 2.42961 0.24551-0.01470 0.01470 0.01173-0.16165 0.05121 17. 0.68367 1.82543 2.42121 0.25897-0.01458 0.01458 0.01268-0.16038 0.05427 18. 0.68571 1.83722 2.41236 0.27210-0.01446 0.01446 0.01368-0.15904 0.05731 19. 0.68794 1.84953 2.40308 0.28487-0.01433 0.01433 0.01475-0.15761 0.06033 20. 0.69038 1.86235 2.39338 0.29728-0.01419 0.01419 0.01589-0.15609 0.06331 21. 0.69305 1.87561 2.38327 0.30931-0.01404 0.01404 0.01711-0.15449 0.06627 22. 0.69596 1.88927 2.37277 0.32095-0.01389 0.01389 0.01844-0.15280 0.06920 23. 0.69914 1.90325 2.36189 0.33218-0.01373 0.01373 0.01989-0.15101 0.07209... 34/60

Crack tip opening displacement (CTOD), crack blunting blunt while loaded CTOD Evaluation of the CTOD (α close to 1) CTOD = α J = α K I 2 σ 0 Eσ 0 Some expressions for α (McMeeking, 1977) α = 0.55 α = 0.54(1 + 1/N) α = 0.55 ( 2 3 (1 + ν)(1 + N)σ 0/E ) 1/N 35/60

T stress, Q factor and stress triaxiality T stress : +T δ i1 δ 1j Q factor : +Qσ 0 δ ij Stress triaxiality τ = 1 σ kk 3 σ eq Faster damage if T > 0, Q > 0 and high τ 36/60

Q factor Modification of the HRR field (O Dowd & Shih, 1991, 1992) ( J σ ij = σ 0 σ 0 ε 0 I N r ) 1 N + 1 σij (θ, N) + Qσ 0 δ ij Q (a non-dimensionnal factor) corresponds to an hydrostatic pressure 37/60

Part IV Fracture criteria 38/60

Fracture criterion : LEFM The released energy is used to create the crack (Griffith, 1920) G = G c = 2γ s so that the critical stress intensity factor is given by: K Ic = E plane stress 2γ se with E = E plane strain 1 ν 2 so that the failure criterion is given by K I = K Ic 39/60

Which value for G c? Surface energy: γ s 1 J/m 2 For steel (E = 200 GPa, ν = 0.3) K Ic = 2γ se = 0.7 MPa m Plasticity at the crack tip increases the apparent surface energy γ s γ s + γ p For K Ic = 50MPa m, γ p = 6000 J/m 2 γ s 40/60

Fracture criterion : NLFM J as a fracture parameter Does it work? J = J c K J = JE 41/60

Test on SENB specimens with various a/w ratios 300 250 data fit JIc (kj/m 2 ) 200 150 100 W a 50 0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 a/w 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 SENB = Single Edge Notched Bending 42/60

J Q approach Different specimens and a/w ratios 250 200 CCP a/w = 0.63 CCP a/w = 0.77 SENB 0.05 < a/w < 0.78 fit JIc (kj/m 2 ) 150 100 50 0-1.5-1.0 Q -0.5 0.0 43/60

Effect of specimen geometry on J a curves 2000 1500 J (kj/m 2 ) 1000 SENT CT 500 X100 steel 0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 a (mm) 4.0 5.0 44/60

Part V Evaluation of fracture parameters: K, T, J, Q 45/60

Calculation of K Smoothing of stresses σ yy(θ = 0) = K ( ) I KI log(σ yy) = log 1 2πr 2π 2 log(r) 6 5 log(k I / (2π)) 4 3 log(σyy) 2 1 0-1 -2-3 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 log(x) 46/60

Smoothing of displacements u y(θ = π) = 4K I(1 ν 2 ) E 2π 1 0-1 -2 r log(uy) = log ( 4KI (1 ν 2 ) E 2π ) + 1 2 log(r) log(uy) -3-4 -5-6 ( log 4K I (1 ν 2 )/E ) (2π) -7-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 log(x) 47/60

Calculation of J and K Contour integral J = Γ ( wdx 2 T. u ) ds x 1 T = σ. n n ds x2 crack Γ x1 In fact, it is difficult to evaluate the contour integral based on FE results 48/60

Virtual crack extension method a: virtual crack extension Γ e Γ i y crack a x Γ i is translated by a Γ e is fixed Interpolation for nodes between Γ i and Γ e : x Replace the contour integral by a volume integral (Delorenzi (1985)) G = J = 1 ( σ. u ) a Ω x w1. x x dω = K 2 E 49/60

Is J path-independent? (1/2) Crack tip mesh (SENT specimen) Use of von Mises plasicity σ eq R(p) = 0 ε p = 3 2 ṗ s σ eq ε = ε e + ε p σ = E : ε e or use of non-linear elasticity σ = E : ( ε 3 2 R 1 (σ s ) eq) σ eq 50/60

Is J path-independent? (2/2) Results von Mises Non-linear elasticity 51/60

Calculation of T Simple method (σ yy σ xx) T as x 0 Contour integral T = E ( u.σ u.σ). n dc where σ and u are solutions ; σ and u are given by C σ xx = σ yy = σ xy = cos 2θ + cos 4θ 2πr 2 cos 2θ cos 4θ 2πr 2 sin 4θ 2πr 2 ux = 1 κ cos θ + cos 3θ 4πr 2G u y = 1 4πr κ sin θ + sin θ 2G Based on FE results T = E C ( u FE.σ u.σ FE ). n dc 52/60

To avoid contour integrals and use volume integral T = E (( u FE u tip FE ).σ u.σ FE ). gradq dω Ω 1.0 0.5 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 53/60

Example 54/60

Calculation of Q HRR r c J/σ 0 ρ 0 ρ ρ/ρ 0 > 5 finite strain zone 2r c Qσ 0 Q = σfe yy σ HRR yy σ 0 at θ = 0 and x = 2r c (O Dowd & Shih, 1991,1992) 55/60

Meshes 56/60

local fields (ρ 0 = 2µm ρ = 50µm) 1700 1 1600 Stress (MPa) 1500 1400 1300 1200 Cumulated plastic strain 0.1 0.01 1100 1000 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.001 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Distance (mm) Distance (mm) 57/60

Element formulation (large plastic strains, plastic incompressibility) 58/60

Application ux = K r 2µ 2π cos θ 2 uy = K r 2µ 2π sin θ 2 ( k 1 + 2 sin 2 θ ) 2 ( k + 1 2 cos 2 θ ) 2 3 4ν plane strain k = 3 ν 1 + ν plane stress J 0 1 2 J t ρ L Interface ρoy (x, y) θ Ox crack tip region R stress triaxiality plastic strain 59/60

Characteristic lengths Plastic zone size Process zone size Relative importance R p = α 1 ( K σ 0 ) 2 α 1 = 1 3π... 1 π R PZ = α 2 K 2 Eσ 0 α 2 1 2 R PZ R p σ 0 E 1 R p R PZ crack 60/60

J. R. Rice. A path independent integral and the approximate analysis of strain concentration by notched and cracks. J. Applied Mech., 35:379, 1968. J. R. Rice and G. F. Rosengren. Plane strain deformation near a crack tip in a power-law hardening material. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 16:1 12, 1968. J. W. Hutchinson. Plastic stress and strain fields at a crack tip. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 16:337 342, 1968. R.M. McMeeking. Finite deformation analysis of crack-tip opening in elastic-plastic materials and implications for fracture. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 25:357 381, 1977. C.F. Shih. Tables of Hutchinson Rice Rosengren singular field quantities. Technical report, MRL E-147, Brown University, 1983. N.P. O Dowd and C.F. Shih. Family of crack-tip fields characterized by a triaxiality parameter I. Structure of Fields. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 39(8):989 1015, 1991. 60/60

N.P. O Dowd and C.F. Shih. Family of crack-tip fields characterized by a triaxiality parameter II. Fracture applications. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 40(8):939 963, 1992. H.G. Delorenzi. Energy release rate calculations by the finite element method. Eng. Fract. Mech., 21(1):129 143, 1985. C.S. Chen, R. Krause, R.G. Pettit, L. Banks-Sills, and A.R. Ingraffea. Numerical assessment of T stress computation using a p version finite element method. Int. J. Frac., 107:177 199, 2001.