Vol. 21, pp. 1045-1049, 1987 Printed in the U.S.A.

Pergamon Journals, Ltd. All rights reserved


(Received December 24, 1986) (Revised May 26, 1987)
Introduction IKEDA et al. / I / f i r s t measured the cyclic work to produce a unit area of fatigue crack U, using micro strain gages stuck in the plastic zone associated with a fatigue crack. LIAW et al. /2/ compiling the experimental measurements of this parameter have shown that U is roughly proportional to the inverse of the cyclic y i e l d stress Oc. for a particular alloy group and have suggested that maximizing the quantity oc.U should mlnlmlse the fatigue crack growth rate. Subsequently, different techniques have been developed to measure this important quantity U, techniques which include subgrain size measurements /3/, micro calorimetry /4/, and infrared thermography /5/. Recent work by the author /6,7/ have shown that the hysteretic work can be directly measured by compliance measurements and at high AK levels the value of U reaches a constant level, U c r . The value of Uc~ measured on the 2024-T351 aluminum alloy was shown to be equal to 2.65 + 0.6.10 5 j/m2, which ~s comparable to what was measured by LIAW et al. /2/ using the s t r a i # gage technique. In this paper the evolution of U with respect to the R r a t i o and the AK level is presented an the 2024-T351 aluminum alloy and the observed results are discussed with respect to available results in the l i t e r a t u r e . Experimental Procedure The tests were conducted using standard compact tension specimens 12 m m thick and 75 m m wide, as shown in figure I . Constant amplitude fatigue crack growth tests were conducted using an INSTRON servohydraulic machine at four R ratios of O.Ol, O.l, 0.33, 0.7 covering a wide AK range f r o m 4 M ~ to 40 MPa J'm at a typical test frequency of 20 Hz in ambiant air. At different &K levels, the test frequencies were reduced to 0.05 Hz and diagrams representing amplified crack mouth opening 6' with respect to the load P were obtained using an X-Y plotter. 6' is defined as : 6' = ( 6 - aP)x M where : 6 is the crack mouth opening displacement measured by an extensometer. a is the specimen compliance for a given crack length M is an electronic amplification factor, M = 25. Examples of 6 vs P and 6' vs P curves are shown in figure 2. The area of the 6'-p diagram is proportional to the hysteretic work Q multiplied by a factor F. The factor F represents the correction factor required to convert crack mouth opening displacement to load line displacement (F < l).The factor F was determined from N E W M A N ' Sf i n i t e element analysis for the specimens geometry /8/.

1045 0036-9748/87 $3.00 + .00 Copyright (c) 1987 Pergamon Journals Ltd.

U increases gradually.6. I t can also be seen in this figure that this chang#Vof slope takes place at a near constant growth rate of about lO-7m/cycle. 4 . The present results are however in slight disagreement with the work of JOSEPH and G R O S S /4/ concerning the evolution of U with respect to AK in a c6arbo~ steel using microcalorimetry. U is on the order of 5.7 and for AK value of 4.7/. This effect was not taken into account in the present study. They have associated thi~ decrease with achangein the fracture mode. Thesecurves show that for a given AK level da/dN increases with R. The increase of U at low AK values. At higher AK levels plane stress effects might become predominant /lO/. As has been shown previously /6. The value of Ucr obtained in the present study is equal to 1. He has proposed that the constant U level at high AK values can be associated with fullydeveloped mode I type crack propagation. In general an average slope of 4 is observed at high AK levels.5 MPa / m m . I t can also be noted from figure 4 that for AK < aKcr .2 where the energy dissipated in the plastic zone was measured using f o i l strain gages on center cracked specimens of the 2024-T4 aluminum alloy. Such a dependanceof U with respect to R r a t i o and the AK value has been predicted by the model due to DAVIDSON / l l / . is about 25 times as high as the Ucr level. in plane strain /8/. 3 . This difference can also be associated with the correction factor F used in the present study to translate crack mouth opening displacements to load line displacements.. Theseresults are in accordance with those previously obtained on the same alloy /g/. especially near the threshold according to DAVIDSON / l l / . U reaches a c r i t i c a l minimum level. The value Ucr reported in the present study is comparable to the value of U given in Ref.66 + 0. No.65 + 0. when AK reaches a c r i t i c a l value called aKcr. The previous results were obtained on modified compliance specimens where the crack opening displacement was d i r e c t l y measured under the loading line.1046 FATIGUE CRACK PROPAGATION Vol.105-J/m2 /6. In that work. U reaches a near constant level of about 7. Experimental Results and Discussion The evolution of da/dN with respect to AK for the four values of R tested is shown in f i g . U decreases with AK for lower AK levels. 8 The specific energy U is defined as : U= Q 2B x da/dN and da/dN the crack growth rate measured by an electric where B is the specimen thickness potential drop technique. This correction factor depends upon the center of rotation and in the present analysis the center of rotation was estimated based on N E W M A N ' S f i n i t e element analysis. The relationship between the specific energy U and AK is shown in f i g . The values of AK for which the slope of 4 is f i r s t reached.105 J/m2 which is s l i g h t l y lower than the previously reported one which is 2.10 J/m for AK : l O MPa 4--~-which is similar to the present result for AK > AK r" Howeverin t h e i r work.27. I t should be noted that the present study relates to a new series of the-alloy. 21.7/. For example at a R ratio of 0. Also. these curves show a decrease of slope at moderate AK values as compared to low AK levels . called Ucr. which can lead to a change in the center of rotation. . hereby called AK~.106 J/m2 which. can be associated with the progressive developmentof a mode I I component at the crack t i p . depends upon R as shown in the figure.

In the present study for AK > AKcr .8 6. No.7 ll. the value of U is constant and equal to Ucr. This phenomenon is under investigation based on f o i l strain gage measurements in the plastic zone for the same alloy. 8 FATIGUE CRACK P R O P A G A T I O N 1047 One possible reason for the differences observed in the relationships between U and AK can be the fact that the hysteretic energy measured in the present work takes into account the total mechanical energy dissipated during a cycle. while JOSEPH and GROSSmeasured the heat generated at the crack t i p during fatigue cycling.l 0. Conclusions l) The hysteretic mechanical work to create a unit crack surface during fatigue crack propagation has been measured for 4 R ratios for the 2024 T351 aluminum alloy. I t is possible that some of the mechanical work. 5) The effect of crack surface contact may lead to some mechanical energy loss at low R values. 4) The value of U increases for AK < AKcr. the aKcv MPa~ O.33 0.7.AKcr and R.Vol.Ol. 21. 2) The value of U reaches a constant minimum level for AK values greater than a c r i t i c a l level called aKcr. where no crack closure could be detected show a similar trend as for tests conducted at lower R values. l l / .8 AKcr (MPaV-m) 20 14 12 lO TABLE l : Relationships between AKcv.5 7. At this R value the effect of crack closure can lead to some mechanical energy loss because of crack surface cohtact. However.2 9. . which is stored in the material and which can be associated with the blocking of dislocations is not converted into heat /12/. A second reason is that the present measurements do not take into account the possible effect of crack closure which can result in some hystereticlosscaused bycrack surface contact. value of AKcr can thus be compared to aKcv as defined in t h i s study (Table I ) . I t has been previously reported that the relationship between U and AK depends upon that relating da/dN and AK and U showntobe independent of AK when the Paris law exponent is equal to 4 /4.Ol O. I t can be seen here that the aKcv and AKcr values are comparable except for R = O. 3) AKcr decreases as R increases. the evolution of U with respect to AK for tests at R = 0. but for the evolution of AKcr.

FIG. ASTMSTP. Engng.K. H. FINE and D. N E W M A NJr. 8 References / l / S. American Society for Testing and Materials.L. Doc. I05 (1974). RANGANATHAN. Thickness 12 i Q .. London (1973).. (1985). 3. JOSEPH and J. Frac. de FOUQUET. 2. /6/ N. Mech.. Engng. Philadelphia USA ASTM STP (in press). American Society for Testing and Materials. /9/ N. Frac.K. 589 (1985). Engng. 5. Philadelphia. LIAW.C.I. Strength of Metals and alloys. JOUANNA. P and 6 ' - . 4. J. FINE. Y. 2 . RANGANATHAN. FINE. Str. Appl. U. Fat. LIAW. 229 (1981). 1267 (1985) /7/ N. 59 (1980) /4/ A. 63.. 566.. /3/ P. l . PETIT. PETIT and J. Engng. T m J ~S'-P 6-p F I G . Fat. Mat. Fracture analysis. / l l / D.SAIX and P.K.K. Trans.. (1981).J.1048 FATIGUE CRACK PROPAGATION Vol. Pergamon Press. Mec. Metall.L.E. GROSS. USA. Mech. M. es Sc. IZUMI and M. No. Str.Specimen geometry used in the present study. DAVIDSON. Mc Queen et al eds. Rutterwith. IKEDA. RANGANATHAN. Fractography of Modern Engineering Materials. 9. DAVIDSON. 3. Mat.D. 12A. /8/ J. S. Fondamentals of Fracture Mechanics.Journal de M~canique th~orique et appliqu6e. K W U Nand M. BOUCHET and J. Thesis. /5/ C. 1985. /lO/ J.E. C H R Y S O C H O O S .E.S.I .. l . University of Poitiers. J. 123 (1977) /2/ P. 49 (1981). 5. /12/ A. 21.Examples of 6 curves. B. KNOTT.

.Relationship between U a ~ AK . .Vol. 4 I i: .ili. . 4 ' ...4 .~i 3 4 g G 2 8 5 %0 ZO 30 40 FIG. h.. . K - r179 FIG.... * ..4- • • A • • o~o÷ I0 S • uc. .O. . 0 104 . . No. I I • . .. . . Z .. . . 8 FATIGUE CRACK PROPAGATION 1049 10 . . . . .?O ... t.| tO o~ IO-1° . i i ... I .. T.... t ..4I0 G • 4>0 '+At • 4> .. sm N $ $ |o ~'..Relationship between AK and da/dN showing the value of AK where a slope of 4 i s reached ( A K c v ) 10 8 I E I 10 ~ ÷+ e A4L ~)• + •' - R.01 R'.I $ .li.O. . . .. . .. .. ... .il i i i I j . 21. I 0 R. .. . . . " ' ' ' I .O. .. .i. i J i I * i J | i i i i i iliL|i¢. .. . . .i. . ... . 3 3 R. I'""'" 10 o S U L) \ E I 10"C i0_~ \ "0 (0 1o .3 .-O. .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful