Professional Documents
Culture Documents
03 ER Vukelic Format PDF
03 ER Vukelic Format PDF
91
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
UDC 539.421:519.63
Abstract: Numerical fracture toughness assessment of two types of steel, AISI 420 and AISI 431, has been
conducted in this paper. The J-integral is chosen as a criterion for fracture behaviour comparison of
compact type (CT) specimens made of investigated materials. The values of J-integral are determined
through a newly developed algorithm using finite element (FE) stress analysis results of numerically
simulated single specimen test method, which is usually employed for experimental J-integral assessment. J-
integral values are presented in dependence on specimen crack growth size (a) for three initial measures of
specimen's crack size, a/W = 0.25, 0.5, 0.75.
Keywords: J-integral
CT specimen
Fracture
Crack growth
FE analysis
u
J wdy Ti i ds (1)
x
3
where W is strain energy density, Ti = ijnj are 2
1
components of the traction vector, ui are the
displacement vector components and ds is an
incremental length along the contour .
When applied to FE models, the J-integral can be Figure 2. J-integral contour paths (1, 2, 3)
written as [8]: surrounding the crack tip through the
integration points of finite elements
Engineering Review Vol. 31, Issue 2, 91-96, 2011. 93
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
800
700
600
Stress (MPa)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Strain (%)
a) b)
Figure 3. Stress-strain curve for: a) AISI 420. b) AISI 431.
Crack tip
Y det. A
Z X 11
a)
det. A
b)
Figure 6. Verification of numerically obtained J-
Figure 5. a) FE model of CT specimen. B) Detail of
integral values on AISI 304LN
FE mesh around crack tip
Figure 5 shows good compatibility of experimental
After having run FE stress analysis, results were
and numerical results with experimental ones, which
recorded in integration points of elements around
gives a bit more emphasis on conservative values.
the crack tip. This was done for every crack
This correspondence of values encouraged the use
extension size and the results were used as input for
of numerical procedure for AISI 420 and AISI 431,
developed numerical algorithm that calculates J
for which there were no available fracture toughness
values along three paths that enclose the crack tip.
test results. Figures 7 and 8 show final J values for
Their average value represents final value of J for
AISI 420 and AISI 431, as a measure of crack
specific crack size.
driving force versus crack growth size (a).
5. RESULTS
REFERENCES
Received: Accepted:
05.09.2011. 20.09.2011.
Authors address:
Goran Vukeli
Josip Brni
Faculty of engineering, University of Rijeka
Vukovarska 58
51000 Rijeka
Croatia
gvukelic@riteh.hr
brnic@riteh.hr