CHAPTER 3: BASIC CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS 3.

1Basic Definitions:
3.1.1 Deformation Gradient [4]: Consider a body as shown in figure 1 which undergoes some deformations. Let R and R* be the undeformed and deformed states of the body respectively. Let x be the position vector of a point P of the body in R. Position of point P in the deformed configuration is p and its position vector is y. Let dx represents a

Figure 1: Body in undeformed and deformed configurations[4]

Small length elemnt in undeformed configuration and it is changed to dy in the deformed configuration . Then dy and dx are related to each other by (1) where F is given by

(2)

[ and is called the deformation gradient. Here directions respectively.

] are the components of displacement u in

3.1.2 Principle Invariants of a Tensor [3]: For any tensor A we can define three terms called principle invariants which are denoted by I1, I2, I3 and are given by ( ) *, ( )( ) ( ) ( ) ( ( Here are the components of . ) ) ( ) ( )+

3.1.3 Indicial notations [3]: The indicial notations we have used can be understood by taking an example. Let f is a function of then

3.1.4 Cauchy Green Deformation Tensors [4]: 3.1.4.1 Right Cauchy Green deformation tensor: It is defined as (3) Here T denotes the transpose. For calculating the transpose of a tensor the rows and columns of the tensor are interchanged e. g. | | | |

3.1.4.2 Left Cauchy Green deformation tensor: It is defined as (4) 3.1.5 Traction vector: If dF is the force acting on an area ds of the surface of a body then traction vector is defined as

3.1.6 Stress at a point: At any point of the body the state of stress is defined by following stress tensor [ ]

Here represent that the stress is acting in jth direction on a plane which is perpendicular to the ith direction. 3.1.7 Relation between t and [4]: If the normal vector to the surface of the body is n then at that point and t are related by (5) 3.1.8 Types Of Stress Tensor [4], [5]: When a body undergoes large deformations then we have to make distinction between undeformed and deformed configuration. As shown in figure 2 let us assume that traction T is applied on a small surface element dS in R. N is the normal vector on dS. While t and n are the traction vector and normal vector respectively to the surface element ds in R*. Let force acting on the body is df. Then we can define following three types of stress tensors

Figure 2: Body with PK-I and Cauchy traction vectors

3.1.8.1 Cauchy Stress Tensor : In this tensor the area of deformed configuration is used for stress calculation. It is denoted by and is given by (6) Here t is the Cauchy traction vector. Cauchy stress tensor is symmetric. 3.1.8.2 First Piola-Kirchhoff (PK-I) stress Tensor: In this tensor the area of undeformed configuration is used for stress calculation. It is denoted by and is given by (7) Here T is the first Piola-Kirchhoff (PK-I) traction vector. First Piola-Kirchhoff (PK-I) stress Tensor is not symmetric.

3.1.8.3 Second Piola-Kirchhoff (PK-II) stress Tensor: We define a pseudo force vector such that then second Piola-Kirchhoff stress tensor denoted by S is given by 3.1.9 Relation Between Three Stress Tensors [4]: By equations (6) and (7) we obtain (8)

Using the Nansons relation [4] which relates the normal vectors in deformed and undeformed configurations

Now putting the value of

(9) This is the relation between and . J is the third invariant of incompressible materials. Again from (7) and (8) and its value is 1 for

(10) and putting from (9) (11) This is the relation between and S.

3.2 Hyper elastic materials and basic governing equations:

3.2.1 Hyperelastic materials[4], [5], [6]: Linear elastic material model assumes that the deformations are small in the material. There exist some materials which are elastic but exhibit large deformations upon loading hence linear elastic model is not suitable for such materials. Hyperelastic model is used to characterize such material behavior. Rubber, vulcanized elastomers, unfilled elastomers and biological tissues are some examples whose behavior can be best characterized by hyperelastic model. These materials are a special case of Cauchy elastic materials which means that the stress state depends only on the current state of deformation and not on the path or history of deformation. For these materials stress-strain relationships are derived from strain energy density function W and given by

(12) For general hyperelastic material model W is a function of three principle invariants of the left (or right) Cauchy-Green tensor ( [ The values of are given by [3] ) ]

I is the unit tensor. Putting values in S [ Using (11) [ ( ) ( )] (13) ( ) ( )]

Following are some of the widely used hyperelastic material laws: [5], [6] a. Neo-Hookean b. Mooney-Rivlin c. Polynomial form of order 2 d. Reduced Polynomial form of order 2 e. Arruda-Boyce These all differ in the way that they assume different expressions for W. In this seminar material is chosen to be Neo Hookean because it gives the simplest expression for W. In addition the Neo-Hookean material is assumed to be incompressible. Now to ensure that deformation is locally volume preserving (incompressible) we shall assume that an arbitrary hydrostatic pressure p is acting at all points of the body such that equation (13) converts to [ ( ) ( )] (14)

For Neo-Hookean material W is a function of and will be zero hence from equation (14)

only so the derivatives of W with respect to

(15) and from equation (9) (16)

Chapter 4 Problem Considered And Its Solution

Figure 3: Crack with coordinate system[1] 4.1 Solution of the crack problem: Consider a region R as shown in figure 3 which
represents the open cross section of an infinite slab containing a crack of length 2c. The slab is to be deformed in finite anti plane shear. Such a deformation is characterized by[1] ( )

Our goal is to find which will satisfy the boundary conditions and equilibrium equations and consistent with the constitutive relation (15) and (16). Now with the above displacement components the values of and from equations (2) and (3) will be

] [ ( ) ( ) ]

So from the state of stress in the slab in terms of PK-I stress tensor from equation (16) is

] [ ]

(17)

And in terms of Cauchy stress tensor from equation (15) is

[ [ ( ) ( ) ]

(18) ( The equilibrium equations in terms of and are[2] (19) ( ) ( ) )

(20)

Since the surface of the crack is a free surface i.e. there is no load at that surface so traction will be zero along the crack faces in both deformed and undeformed configuration. We cannot determine the stress boundary conditions in terms of Cauchy stresses because body has undergone large deformations so in the deformed configuration we do not know the nomal vector in the plane of crack. We can determine the boundary conditions only in terms of PK-I stresses so we shall solve equation and determine the state of stress . Then from the relation between and we shall determine which we are finally interested in. From (17) and (20) 0 1 [ ] (21) (22)

Here and both have the range 1, 2. Since left side expression of equation (22) is a function of and only so p should be linear in . And the two equations (21) require that should be independent of so let us assume p to be of the following form ( Where ) ( ) (23)

is an arbitrary constant. Putting p into equations (21) and (22) [ ] (24)

Solving equation (24) we get (25) Load along the crack faces is zero so the traction vector along the crack line is { } Normal vector of the crack faces in R is { } So by the relation between and we get boundary conditions (27) (26)

(28) is already zero. By the second boundary condition we get

( This equation should be true for all values of

) so we get

From third boundary condition we get

So we get the condition (29) After putting the value of p in equation (22) we get the condition [ There is one additional boundary condition distances from the crack tip [2] i. e. ] should correspond to simple shear at large (30)

(31) Here k represents the amount of shear. Now the problem converts to finding such that it satisfies (29), (30) and (31). One more condition on is that it should be bounded near the crack tips [2]. For the Neo-Hookean material the value of W is given by ( ) ( )

Using this value the equation (30) converts to

(32) And the value of stresses is *( The global solution of this problem is given by [1] ( So the values of stresses are ( ) (33) ) ) ( ) +

(34)

(35) Resultant shear stress is ( ) (36)

The near tip approximation of near the right crack tip is denoted by and is given as, ( ) (37)

If the problem is solved using the linear theory than near tip approximation of is found to be same as that obtained above but in linear theory comes out to be zero but here since the material behaviour is nonlinear hence is not only nonzero but nonlinear also. Again we note that is the only nonlinear effect present here so we shall use the value of (35) to compare with the value of (36) to get a measure of nonlinearity of the problem.

4.2 Condition for the nonlinearity to be small scale:

4.2.1 level nonlinear zone ( ) [1]: If represents the specified error tolerance than for this crack problem the inequality

represents the set of all points ( level (because get

) for which the elastic field is approximately non linear at

is non linear and is linear). Putting values from equations (35) and (36) we

(38) ( Figures 4, 5 and 6 show ) ) for different values of k. It can be seen that

level nonlinear zone (

Figure 4:

level nonlinear zone (

), k=0.9 [1]

Figure 5:

level nonlinear zone (

), k= [1]

Figure 6:
For k
( )

level nonlinear zone (

( )

), k=
and
( )

, such that
( )

contains two bounded, connected subsets

( ) ( )

+ while ( contained. And for 4.2.2

) contains right (left) crack tip. In this case we say that nonlinear effect is is unbounded.
( )

level near tip linear zone for right crack tip (

) , -: This represents set of all points

for which relative error committed by near tip approximation to the resultant shear stress is in magnitude at most i. e. set of all points for which | |

Putting values | Figures 7 and 8 show the . / |

( )

(39) for and .

( )

level near tip linear zone

is the region

between the outer and inner curves and the middle curve is the locus of all points where and are exactly equal. The matlab code for the curves of sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 has been included in the appendix I.

Figure 7: Near tip linear zone

( )

, -

Figure 8: Near tip linear zone

( )

, -

We say that the nonlinear effect is small scale if it is contained and

( )

( )

( )

( )

(40)

Since the problem is symmetric about the axis so if we satisfy either of the condition of equation (40) the other will be satisfied automatically so we take first condition
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

(41) and with the axis respectively then

( ) ( ) If and represents the intersection of the by equation (41)

(
( ) ( Now we shall determine and and equation (38) holds with )

(42)
( ) ) belongs to if and only if i. e. if and only if

explicitly. A point ( | |

| | |

( ( And (
( So )

) )

coincides with the interval ( )

)

) and equation (39) holds with | |

(43)

( A point ( ) belongs to | | i. e. if and only if

if and only if

. /

| | |

. /

| | | | | | . / (

. / ( 0 ) ,

) -1 |

. /

| | | | | | (

. / 0 ,

(
( So )

) -1

coincides with the interval (44) ( ( ) 0 ) 0 , , ( ( ) -1 ) -1

We can verify that (45) From equation (42), (43) and (45) it follows that ( ) ( ) ) ) (46)

( (

( So from above two equations we can write { ( We can show that for all values of equation (47) may be written as ) (

)}

(47)

between 0 and 1 first entry is smaller than second so

(48) ( ) (49) then k must satisfy the

Now we have shown that if the nonlinear effect is small scale at level

condition (48). It can also be shown [1] that equation (48) is sufficient as well as necessary for equation (42) and also that equation (42) implies equation (41). So it follows that equation (48) supplies necessary as well as sufficient condition to be satisfied by the amount of shear at infinity k if the nonlinear effect in the crack problem considered to be small scale at level .

FINITE STRAIN DEFORMATION NEAR THE TIP OF CRACK IN HYPERELASTIC SOLIDS Abstract: Analysis of cracked bodies is a very important subject from the point of view of fracture. Linear elastic fracture mechanics is used for the analysis of most cracked bodies. This theory is valid for the elastic bodies undergoing small deformations. Here in this report, by relaxing the assumption of small strains the crack problem has been analyzed for hyperelastic material which shows large deformations. The body has been assumed to be deforming in anti plane shear. A condition has also been derived under which the error committed by linear approximation of finite deformation problem will be less than a specified value.

Keywords: Large deformation, Cauchy stresses, Hyperelastic, Neo-hookean

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction Fracture mechanics is the subject in which we study cracked bodies. It has become very important subject in recent few years. If a crack is present in a body and if it becomes unstable then it propagates through the body and causes catastrophic fracture. In bodies where such fractures may cause high loss both in terms of wealth and human lives e.g. turbines, aircrafts etc., periodic analysis is done check the presence of any crack and its stability. Stability of the crack is directly affected by the stress field around the crack. So it is very important to have an accurate knowledge of state of stress around the crack. Linear elastic fracture mechanics is very widely used for the analysis of cracks. In linear elastic fracture mechanics it is assumed that deformations in the body are very small. This assumption is valid for the metals but it is not for the materials which are elastic but exhibit finite deformations e. g. rubbers, polymers etc. Finite deformation problems always give a nonlinear solution which means that governing differential equations and the relation between stresses and strains turn out to be non linear. These differential equations are very complex to analyze and in and in many cases closed form analytical solutions are not possible. So our motivation is always to solve such problems by linear theories which are simpler but they may lead to errors and in some cases they may give ambiguous results. If we have a condition under which we can guarantee that non linearity will be small at a specified error level in the crack problem then we can apply linear theories safely. In this report we derive such a condition for finite anti plane shear of an infinite body containing a crack of finite length. 1.2 Organisation of report In chapter 1 the overall problem has been introduced. In chapter 2 review of literature has been provided. In chapter 3 some basic concepts and definitions regarding finite deformation theory has been discussed. The material considered and its governing equations have also been discussed. In chapter 4 the considered crack problem has been defined then solved and finally the condition has been derived for which the nonlinear effect in this crack problem will be small at a specified error level. In chapter 5 some conclusions have been discussed. In chapter 6 references have been provided. In the last an appendix which contains the matlab program of sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 has been provided.

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION From equation (48) it can be inferred if the value of is higher then the upper limit on k will also be higher for the nonlinear effect to be of small scale for that level of , it is expected because if the deformation is large then nonlinearity will also be large and the error due to linaer approximation will be large. If the crack is not symmetric about axis then two conditions of equation (40) are not equivalent to each other and the nonlinear effect might be small scale at one crack tip and not at the other. If the material used is not Neo-hookean then expression for W will be different and the results derived will not be valid. This remark also holds if the crack is deformed in mode I or mode II rather than in mode III (anti plane shear).

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Recently much work has been done on the study of deformations and stresses near the tip of crack for hyperelastic materials. Different authors have solved these problems with different simplifying assumptions. J. K. Knowles, E. Sternberg [7] did an asymptotic analysis and calculated the asymptotic values of deformations and stresses in traction free crack in infinite slab under plane strain. They assumed uniform axial tension at infinity at right angles to the faces of crack. J. K. Knowles [2] did analysis of crack in finite anti-plane shear in an infinite slab. He took the material to be Neo-hookean. He also pointed out an analogy between the crack problem in finite anti plane shear and problem of transonic flow of a gas past a flat plate and drew some important conclusions from that analogy about the form of differential equation and the state of stress with change of some parameters. Rodney A. Stephenson [8] did an asymptotic analysis of traction free plane crack under plane strain condition using the power law materials (which in a special case converts to Mooney-Rivlin material and calculated stresses and deformations. J. K. Knowles, E. Sternberg [9] did the asymptotic analysis of traction free interface crack between two dissimilar semi infinite Neo-hookean sheets. J. K. Knowles, A. J. Rosakis [1] did the analysis of anti-plane shear problem in crack and derived the condition for the nonlinesr effect to be small scale. J. M. Herrmann [10] did the asymptotic analysis of traction free crack at interface of two semi infinite slabs bonded under the conditions of plane strain. Philippe H. Geubelle [11] did the asymptotic analysis of stress and strain near the tip of a crack with generalised Neo-hookean material. He assumed the crack to be deforming in mode I and mixed mode. Philippe H. Geubelle [12] did analysis of interface crack between, (1) two generalised Neo-hookean sheets having same hardening characteristics and (2) a generalised Neo-hookean sheet and a rigid substrate. Angelo Marcello [13] did the analysis of motion field surrounding a rapidly propagating crack which is loaded symmetrically in mode I conditions. In this seminar anti-plane shear problem for Neo-hookean material has been studied because this is the simplest problem to solve.

Appendix I Matlab Code For Section 4.2.1 and 4.2.2

%create the following function files function crak=sem(x,y) syms x y crak=1.5^4*(x.^4+y.^4+2*x.^2*y.^2)-(x.^2+1-2*x+y.^2)*(x.^2+1+2*x+y.^2) function crac2=sem2(x,y) syms x y e=0.67 crac2=2*(x.^2+y.^2)*(1+e.^2-2*e)-(x.^2+1+2*x+y.^2)^0.5 function crac2=sem4(x,y) syms x y e=0.67 crac2=2*(x.^2+y.^2)-(x.^2+1+2*x+y.^2)^0.5 function crac2=sem3(x,y) syms x y e=0.67 crac2=2*(x.^2+y.^2)*(1+e.^2+2*e)-(x.^2+1+2*x+y.^2)^0.5 %give the following commands ezplot (sem,[-4,4])

%and separately
ezplot (sem2,[-10,10]);hold on ezplot (sem3,[-10,10]);hold on ezplot (sem4,[-10,10])

REFERENCES [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] J. K. Knowles, A. J. Rosakis (1986), On the scale of nonlinear effect in a crack problem, Journal of Applied Mechanics, 53, 545-549. J. K. Knowles (1977), The finite anti plane shear field near the tip of a crack for a class of incompressible elastic solids, Journal of Elasticity, 13, 611-639. C. S. Jog (2007) Foundations and applications of mechanics, volume 1: continuum mechanics, 2E, Narosa Publication House. R. Narasimhan mechanical engg. dept. IISc Banglore Unpublished class notes www.google.com www.wikipedia .com J. K. Knowles, E. Sternberg (1973), An asymptotic finite deformation analysis of the elastostatic field near the tip of a crack, Journal of Elasticity, 3, 67-107. Rodney A. Stephenson (1982), The equilibrium field near the tip of a crack for finite plane strain of incompressible elastic materials, Journal of Elasticity, 12, 65-99. J. K. Knowles, E. Sternberg (1983), Large deformation near a tip of an intrerface crack between the Neo-Hookean sheets, Journal of Elasticity, 13, 257-293. J. M. Herrmann (1989), An asymptotic analysis of finite deformations near the tip of an interface crack, Journal of Elasticity, 21, 227-269. Philippe H. Geubelle (1994), Finite strains at the tip of a crack in a sheet of hyperelastic material: I. homogeneous case, Journal of Elasticity, 35, 61-98. Philippe H. Geubelle (1994), Finite strains at the tip of a crack in a sheet of hyperelastic material: II. Special biomaterial case, Journal of Elasticity, 35, 99-137. Angelo Marcello (1999), Large deformation near a tip of an intrerface crack between the Neo-Hookean sheets, Journal of Elasticity, 57, 85-103.

[8]

[9]

[10] [11] [12]

[13]