Plasticity, lecture notes

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

Plasticity, lecture notes

© All Rights Reserved

- video_2
- Cohesive Element Model on ABAQUS
- Alternating versus Continuous Rotation: A Comparative Study of the Effect on Instrument Life
- A Review of PWHT Code Exemption
- An Experimental Investigation on Mode-II Fracture of Light Weight Pumice Aggregate Concrete
- Wrekin Ductile Iron Products Brochure
- Caucho Cemento (1)
- [HAY] 386_10_79_
- Pe1084
- opr01EI2
- Crack Nucleation and Propagation
- Subroutine for Cohesive Element
- ubc_1995-0642
- ch09
- SPE-184871-MS
- CTOD (Crack Tipo Con Entalla
- 4461r_91.pdf
- Franc3D V6 Ansys Tutorial5
- Theory
- ASTM_E399.11447

You are on page 1of 18

OUTLINE

2.2.1. Fracture modes

2.2.2. Crack opening mode analysis (Mode I)

2.2.3. Plate with crack under biaxial stress (Mode I)

2.2.4. Crack tip stress field (Mode I)

2.2.5. Superposition of stress intensity factors

2.2.6. General solution of the stress field at a crack tip

2.2.7. Effect of finite size components

2.2.8. Application of the stress analysis approach

2.2.9. Determination of stress intensity factors (SIF)

APPENDIX

2.2.1. Fracture modes

There are three different modes of cracking: Mode I, Mode II and Mode III (Fig.

2.2.1):

• Mode I (opening mode)

• Mode II (sliding or in-plane shearing mode)

• Mode III (tearing or anti-plane shearing mode)

Fig. 2.2.1. Basic modes of crack behavior

The superposition of these three modes is sufficient to describe the most general

case of cracked surface displacement. Mode I has received the most attention

because it is the most severe case of cracking. Therefore, a detailed study of the

stress and elastic strain field is given for this mode. The other two modes can be

treated in similar manners.

1

2.2.2. Crack opening mode (Mode I) analysis

As a special case of Muskhelishvili (1953) general solution for plane elastic

problems, it is possible to use the Westergaard (1939) stress function, 𝜙" 𝑧 , in

Mode I for problems with x-axis symmetry. Here, 𝑧 = 𝑥 + 𝑖𝑦 is the complex

number representing the position of the point considered (𝑥, 𝑦). This potential is

used to calculate the stress field using the Airy’s stress function approach. As it

was shown in Chapter 1, Airy’s stress function leads to the stress components

∂- 𝜙" ∂- 𝜙" ∂- 𝜙"

𝜎++ = , 𝜎.. = , 𝜎+. = − (without body force) (2.2.1)

∂𝑦 - ∂𝑥 - ∂𝑥 ∂𝑦

This field leads to stresses and strains that satisfy the equilibrium equations and

the compatibility conditions automatically and, therefore, is the solution of a plane

problem (plane stress or plane strain) if the potential is selected properly to satisfy

the boundary conditions. Thus, it is possible to calculate 𝑢+ and 𝑢. . Both plane

stress and plane strain cases can be treated with the same relationships using the

notations of Chapter 2.1, i.e., Young modulus of 𝐸′ = 𝐸 for plane stress and 𝐸′ =

𝐸/ 1 − 𝜈 - for plane strain.

s0

ex

df

s0 Crack s0 u

2a 2a

ey

s0

2.2.2. Plate with a crack subjected to balanced biaxial stress remotely

2.2.3. Plate with crack under biaxial stress (Mode I)

2.2.3.1. General stress field

Let’s assume a large plate subjected to balanced biaxial stress conditions (Fig.

2.2.2). The crack is subjected to Mode I. Therefore, all the quantities defined in this

case, such as stress intensity factor(SIF), elastic strain energy release rate, etc., will

2

have a subscript I, e.g., 𝐾" , 𝐺" , etc. In this case, the Westergaard stress function,

solution of the crack in an infinite plate under biaxial tension, was found and the

displacement field components for the crack flank were obtained, i.e.,

𝑢+ = 0

2𝜎J (2.2.2)

𝑢. = 𝑎- − 𝑥 - ( 𝑥 ≤ 𝑎)

𝐸′

As already mentioned above, this relationship is valid for both plane stress and

plane strain by choosing the correct Young modulus 𝐸′

2.2.3.2. Elastic strain energy release

At this point, the elastic strain energy released by introducing a crack in a material

can be calculated. A crack of length 2𝑎 can be cut in a uniform plate material and

the material relaxes in order to satisfy zero normal and shear stresses inside the

lips of the crack. The system plate/crack gives up some elastic stored energy when

the material relaxes. This is the elastic strain energy release 𝑈NOP , which was

discussed in Chapter 2.1 and calculated with simple assumptions in the energy

approach to fracture.

Fig. 2.2.3. Schematic of the crack lips

This energy is also the energy necessary to bring the crack lips together by

applying incremental forces inside the crack (Fig. 2.2.3). The incremental force in

the 𝐞𝒚 direction is 𝑑𝑓 = 𝜎𝐵𝑑𝑥 and the work of the incremental force to close the

crack is

3

VW

J

where the factor 2 is because two crack lips have to be considered. In the above

relationship,

2𝑑𝜎

𝑑𝑢. = 𝑎- − 𝑥 - (2.2.4)

𝐸

Therefore, the total work necessary to glue the crack is given by

𝜋𝑎- 𝜎J- 𝐵

𝑈NOP = (2.2.5)

𝐸′

Note that this is the result obtained with the energy approach. However, in the

present case, no assumption was made concerning the stress field since, because of

the use of an Airy function, the exact solution was obtained. In the energy

approach, the stress components were assumed to be zero in an ellipse of large

and small axes equal to 4𝑎 and 2𝑎, respectively. It is therefore worth looking at the

stress for different values on the 𝐞𝒚 axis (𝑥 = 0). It can be shown that

𝑦

𝜎++ = 𝜎.. = 𝜎J (2.2.6)

𝑦 - + 𝑎-

The value of 𝜎++ /𝜎J (stress factor) is represented in Fig. 2.2.4. For 𝑦 = 2𝑎 and 𝑥 =

0, the exact solution of the problem gives 𝜎++ = 𝜎.. = 2/ 5. This value is not even

close to zero, as assumed in the energy method, and although this assumption was

not very good, the elastic strain energy release calculated by the energy method

(Chapter 2.1) was correct.

1

0.8

Stress factor

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Distance from crack lip (y)

Fig. 2.2.4. Stress as a function of distance from crack lip

4

2.2.3.3. Elastic strain energy release rate

The strain energy release rate is defined by

∂𝑈NOP ∂𝑈NOP ∂𝑎 1 ∂𝑈NOP 𝜋𝑎𝜎J- 𝐾"-

𝐺" = = = = = (2.2.7)

∂𝑆 ∂𝑎 ∂𝑆 2𝐵 ∂𝑎 𝐸′ 𝐸′

because 𝐾" = 𝜎J 𝜋𝑎. In Eq. (2.2.7), 𝑆 is the cracked surface area (𝑆 = 2𝑎𝐵 ) and 𝐾"

is the stress intensity factor as defined in the energy approach of Griffith. The

previous equation shows the equivalence of 𝑮𝑰 and 𝑲𝑰 .

2.2.4. Crack tip stress field (Mode I)

Near the crack tip, the stress can be obtained using the transformation, 𝑧 − 𝑎 =

𝜉 = 𝑟𝑒 cd . Point T is becoming the new origin. A point of coordinate 𝜉 can also be

represented with the cylindrical coordinates (Fig. 2.2.5).

eq

y

ey er

r

P

Crack q

O T ex x

a a

Fig. 2.2.5. Crack tip geometry definition

From the Westergaard solution, the stress field near the crack tip can be expressed

as follows

𝜃 3𝜃

1 − sin sin

𝜎++ 2 2

𝐾" 𝜃 𝜃 3𝜃

𝜎.. = cos 1 + sin sin (2.2.8)

𝜎+. 2𝜋𝑟 2 2 2

𝜃 3𝜃

sin cos

2 2

Note that these expressions are valid near the crack tip, at distances 𝑟 that are

small compared to the crack size 2𝑎. It is worth noting the singularity at point T

where 𝑟 = 0. For plane stress, 𝜎ii = 0 and, for plane strain, 𝜎ii = 𝜈 𝜎++ + 𝜎.. as

5

shown in the theory of elasticity for this state. 𝐾" is the opening mode of the

stress intensity factor

𝐾" = lim 𝜎.. 2𝜋𝑟 = 𝜎J 𝜋𝑎 MPa m (2.2.9)

N→J dmJ

Although the stress is infinite at the tip, 𝐾" describes the intensity of the stress

distribution near the crack tip, i.e., the severity of the loading (Fig. 2.2.6).

5

4

(arbitrary units)

K =1

I

2

K =2

I

yy

K =3

s

1 I

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Distance from crack tip (arbitrary units)

Fig. 2.2.6. Stress field (𝜎.. ) at crack tip

2.2.5. Superposition of stress intensity factors

2.2.5.1. Single mode

Because of the superposition principle in elasticity, the solution of a boundary

value problem with identical geometry and crack mode can be superimposed. For

instance, for the same geometry and crack mode, the stress intensity factor

resulting from the superposition of two boundary conditions (1) and (2) is

(q) (-)

𝐾" = 𝐾" + 𝐾" (2.2.10)

For instance, let’s take the example of the infinite plate with a central crack (size

2𝑎) subjected to uniaxial tension. This can be decomposed into the plate subject to

biaxial tension superimposed with the plate subjected to uniaxial compression (Fig.

2.2.7). These stress states are denoted (a), (b) and (c), respectively. We are looking

for the stress intensity factor for (a)

6

s0 s0

ey ey ey

ex

= +

ex ex

2a 2a 2a

s0 s0

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 2.2.7. Infinite plate with a central crack subjected to uniaxial tension

The stress field for (b) is known because studied previously. For (c) the solution is

obtained for the Airy’s stress function with potential 𝜙 = −𝜎J 𝑦 - /2 (it is like an

uniform plate under compression). Then,

𝜎++ −𝜎J

𝜎 .. = 0 (2.2.11)

𝜎+. 0

(r)

𝐾" = lim 2𝜋𝑟𝜎.. 𝜃 = 0 = 0 (2.2.12)

N→J

Therefore,

(s) (t) (r) (t)

𝐾" = 𝐾" + 𝐾" = 𝐾" (2.2.13)

Near the crack tip, the term 2𝑟 𝑎 become small compared to 1. Therefore, the

stress field around the crack tip was not modified by the introduction of the

compressive stress field in the 𝐞𝐱 direction. This result was generalized by

Williams (1957).

2.2.5.1. Mixte mode

Solutions for the same geometry and different crack modes (mixed mode)

cannot superimpose. However, in that case, energies can add, which leads to

𝐾"- + 𝐾""- 𝐾""" -

𝐺 = 𝐺" + 𝐺"" + 𝐺""" = + w (2.2.14)

𝐸′ 2𝜇

7

2.2.6. General solution of the stress field at a crack tip

A general solution of the stress field at a crack tip was obtained by Williams

(1957) for linear elastic materials in terms of a series expansion

𝐾y y

𝜎cx = 𝐹cx 𝜃 + higher order terms (for mode 𝑀 = 𝐼, 𝐼𝐼, 𝐼𝐼𝐼) (2.2.15)

2𝜋𝑟

where 𝐹cxy 𝜃 are functions of the crack configuration. This result can be obtained

using a stress function more general than Westergaard. Because only the stress

near the tip is important (i.e., r is small), the higher order terms can be neglected.

~

Therefore, • 𝐹cxy 𝜃 represents the asymptotic solution, which gives the 𝑟 •q/-

-€N

singularity.

syy

Asymptotic s pa

0

solution

2pr

Real solution

ey

ex r1 r2 r

Crack

Fig. 2.2.8. Real and asymptotic stress solution near crack tip

Fig. 2.2.9. Stress intensity for finite size specimen (Y is a constant correction factor

for the particular geometry considered)

On Fig. 2.2.8, if the solid line is the exact solution, the dash line represents this

asymptotic solution. It is a good approximation for a radius 𝑟 not exceeding 𝑟q .

Sometimes, it is necessary to use the second term of the series (the so-called T

stress) to get a better approximation. In this case, the approximation of the real

8

solution is extended up to a radius 𝑟- . Usually, the asymptotic solution is valid for r

less than a few percent of other characteristic distances of the problem (crack

length, etc., see Meguid’s book).

2.2.7. Effect of finite size components

For finite size and specific geometry, the stress intensity factor (SIF) needs to be

corrected with a factor 𝑌, i.e.,

𝐾" = 𝑌𝜎J 𝜋𝑎 (2.2.16)

as illustrated by Fig. 2.2.9. This factor can be a function of 𝑓 𝑎/𝑊 , where 𝑊 is a

characteristic dimension of the considered shape. For elliptical or semi-elliptical

crack, the correction factor is also a function of the ratio of the ellipses 𝑎/𝑐. The

stress intensity factor (SIF) can be obtained using theoretical, numerical and

experimental techniques. Examples of correction factors 𝑓 𝑎/𝑊 for specific

specimens are given in the tables below. In these tables, the correction factors are

expressed in the form

𝑃

𝐾" = 𝑓 𝑎/𝑊 (2.2.17)

𝐵 𝑊

where 𝑃 is the load, 𝑊 the width and 𝐵 the thickness. In these examples, the stress

†

is 𝜎 = where 𝑛 is 1 or 2. Therefore

‡ˆ‰

𝑊

𝐾" = 𝑛 𝑊𝜎𝑓 𝑎/𝑊 = 𝑛 𝜎 𝜋𝑎𝑓 𝑎/𝑊 (2.2.18)

𝜋𝑎

The relationship between these corrections factors is

𝑛- 𝑊

𝑌= 𝑓 𝑎/𝑊 (2.2.19)

𝜋𝑎

As an application, the relationship between 𝑌 and 𝑎/𝑊 for a middle tension (MT)

specimen is given. The factor 𝑓 𝑎/𝑊 from the table is

𝜋𝑎 1 𝑎 - 𝑎 Œ

𝑓 𝑎/𝑊 = 4𝑊 𝜋𝑎 1 − 0.025

𝑊

+ 0.06

𝑊

(2.2.20)

cos

2𝑊

with 𝑛 = 2. Therefore, the correction factor becomes

9

1 𝑎 - 𝑎 Œ

𝑌= 𝜋𝑎 1 − 0.025 𝑊 + 0.06 (2.2.21)

cos 𝑊

2𝑊

It is graphically represented as a function of 𝑎 𝑊 in Fig. 2.2.10

Figure 2.2.10. Correction factor 𝑌 for MT specimen

Tables

Cracked specimen and SIF correction factor

(See below)

10

11

12

13

14

2.2.8. Application of the stress analysis approach

Since the stress value near a crack tip is always very high (infinite at the crack tip),

the strength of materials approach to failure prediction stipulating that the

material fails when the maximum stress reaches a critical value (yield or ultimate

stresses) cannot be used here. When a cracked plate is subjected to a small load,

although the stress field near the crack tip becomes very high, the plate does not

fail. However, as the load increases to some critical value, the plate fails.

The energy balance approach of Griffith tells us that crack propagation becomes

unstable when the stress intensity factor reaches a critical value 2𝐸′𝛾O , which is a

material properties. By analogy, we can therefore postulate that, a material will fail

when the stress intensity factor, for either mode I, II or III, reaches a critical value.

These values are called critical stress intensity factor or fracture toughness of

the material (see Fig. 2.2.11). For instance, for Mode I, the structure is safe if

𝐾" ≤ 𝐾"r (2.2.22)

These critical values of fracture toughness are denoted by 𝐾"r , 𝐾""r or 𝐾"""r . They

are material properties and can be measured. Alternatively, the values of the

elastic strain energy release rate may be used as failure criteria, i.e.,

𝐺" ≤ 𝐺"r (2.2.23)

syy KI(3) = K Ic

r

Fig. 2.2.11. Fracture criterion

2.2.9. Determination of stress intensity factors (SIF)

The stress intensity factor can be determined for any structural component,

depending on the nature and complexity of the geometry, using:

• Analytical methods

• Numerical methods

15

• Experimental methods

The block diagram of Fig. 2.2.13 summarizes these different techniques. In the

Appendix, the experimental compliance measurement method is described in

more details.

Fig. 2.2.13. Methods for determining the stress intensity factor (SIF)

16

APPENDIX:

Compliance measurements

In the previous chapter, we saw that the elastic energy release per unit surface

extension is the elastic energy release rate, i.e.,

∂𝑈NOP 1 ∂𝑈NOP

𝐺= = (if crack length is 𝑎) (2.2.24)

𝑑𝑆 𝐵 𝑑𝑎

where 𝑠 is the cracked area and 𝐵 is the plate thickness. The elastic strain energy

release rate is the energy available to create a crack extension 𝑑𝑎. Experimentally,

we can measure it using the compliance method. First, let’s assume a tensile

machine for which we record the load 𝑃 and displacement 𝑢. We define the

stiffness 𝑆 and the compliance 𝐶 of the machine as

1 𝑃

𝑆= = (2.2.25)

𝐶 𝑢

Linear elastic material

A P u

P C

P-dP

E

S(a) Stiffness S

Load

Compliance C a

S(a+da) C = 1/S

B D

O u u+du

Displacement

Fig. 2.2.14. Load-displacement curve for a crack body in fixed load and fixed grip

loading

Usually, tensile machines are controlled either with the load or with the

displacement. When the displacement is kept constant, if the crack length

increases by 𝑑𝑎 , the compliance will decrease and the load will decrease (Fig.

2.2.14). The strain elastic energy released is equal to

1 1 1

𝑑𝑈NOP = 𝑃𝑢 − 𝑢 𝑃 − 𝑑𝑃 = 𝑢𝑑𝑃

2 2 2 (2.2.26)

(area 𝑂𝐴𝐵 − 𝑂𝐸𝐵 )

17

When the load is kept constant, if the crack length increases by da , the compliance

will decrease and the displacement will increase. The elastic strain energy released

is equal to

1 1 1

𝑑𝑈NOP = 𝑃𝑢 − 𝑃 𝑢 + 𝑑𝑢 + 𝑃𝑑𝑢 = 𝑃𝑑𝑢

2 2 2 (2.2.27)

(area 𝑂𝐴𝐵 − 𝑂𝐶𝐷 + 𝐴𝐵𝐶𝐷 )

The term 𝑃𝑑𝑢 (area 𝐴𝐵𝐶𝐷 ) is because the system receives some energy due to

the work of the load under displacement 𝑑𝑢 . Therefore,

1

𝑑𝑈NOP = 𝑃𝑑𝑢 (2.2.28)

2

It is clear from Figs. 2.2.14 and 2.2.15, that 𝑢𝑑𝑃/2 and 𝑃𝑑𝑢/2 are different only

at the second order by the quantity 𝑑𝑢𝑑𝑃/2 (area 𝐴𝐶𝐸 ). Therefore, the elastic

strain energy released is the same for either constant load or constant

displacement control. Therefore, in both cases the elastic energy release rate is

given by

1 ∂𝑈s 1 ∂𝑢 1 - ∂𝐶

𝐺= = 𝑃 = 𝑃 (2.2.29)

𝐵 ∂𝑎 2𝐵 ∂𝑎 2𝐵 ∂𝑎

A A C

E E

O B O B D

Figure 2.2.15. Energy balance for fixed load and fixed displacement

18

- video_2Uploaded byRaja Ramachandran
- Cohesive Element Model on ABAQUSUploaded bychesspalace2
- Alternating versus Continuous Rotation: A Comparative Study of the Effect on Instrument LifeUploaded byART
- A Review of PWHT Code ExemptionUploaded byrameshvela
- An Experimental Investigation on Mode-II Fracture of Light Weight Pumice Aggregate ConcreteUploaded byIJMER
- Wrekin Ductile Iron Products BrochureUploaded byggrapsas
- Caucho Cemento (1)Uploaded byMaxi Montoya
- [HAY] 386_10_79_Uploaded byTimmy Vo
- Pe1084Uploaded byAvinash
- opr01EI2Uploaded byJason Drake
- Crack Nucleation and PropagationUploaded byAndrei Răzvan Secu
- Subroutine for Cohesive ElementUploaded byBhushanRaj
- ubc_1995-0642Uploaded byShibnathLahiri
- ch09Uploaded byKilona
- SPE-184871-MSUploaded bySS
- CTOD (Crack Tipo Con EntallaUploaded byMarco Bacian
- 4461r_91.pdfUploaded byJM Viray
- Franc3D V6 Ansys Tutorial5Uploaded byDav89
- TheoryUploaded bycemalbalci
- ASTM_E399.11447Uploaded byWeiller ML
- 1-s2.0-S0013794413004074-main.pdfUploaded byacar1
- Corrosion Fatigue Phenomena Learned From Failure AnalysisUploaded byDavid Jose Velandia Munoz
- 215-062_Paper Proof_HI0001 (1)Uploaded byClaudio Masjid Maktub
- NONRWA-S-15-00641Uploaded byLucas Máximo Alves
- Crack Formation in F-15 Aircraft CanopiesUploaded bygnanasekar
- Ductile fracture & Brittle Fracture.pdfUploaded bykoontatt
- 1-s2.0-S014211231730350X-mainUploaded byvv
- Abstract (Bucknor) Draft 29052019 (Re-edit)Uploaded bymasing4christ
- Bouchard 2003Uploaded byPiyush Agarawal
- Class Paper ECE 13Uploaded byChimzoe Catalan

- Gravity LecturesUploaded bysplitsailor
- 2014 - Aeroservoelastic Modeling and Analysis of a Missile Control Surface With a Nonlinear Electromechanical ActuatorUploaded byFedericoBetti
- Introduction to EarthquakeUploaded byJayson Isidro
- pdelec[1]Uploaded byCesily
- Seismic Analysis of Structures - IIIUploaded byTusharDatta
- Pumping MechanismsUploaded byzxcvuiop
- BS 1726-1 Guide to Methods of Specifying Tolerances and Testing - Compression Springs 2002Uploaded byLuis Ricardo Osti
- UNIT III (1)Uploaded bymech207
- Assignment 3Uploaded byasas
- Design Measure List for Physics P5Uploaded bywasiqnisar
- Faraday Cage ActivityUploaded byJessica Sanders
- 20315144_120830 Demag DriveUploaded byBoomies1
- Analysis of Perforated Fins through Convective Heat Transfer: A ReviewUploaded byIJAMTES
- Friction and Its EffectsUploaded byShakeel Malek
- Group II 18 2016 AnswerKeyUploaded byMr. Y. Pratap
- Wind Resistant Design Standard for Honshu-Shikoku BridgesGÇªUploaded bycicha_halisa
- Move ProfileUploaded byDragoslav Radoičić
- 41031(341)75Uploaded byUğur Dündar
- Statistics Show That Lateral Overturns Are the Most Frequent Fatal Accidents Involving TractorsUploaded byadildhkh
- 1973 AP Physics C FRQUploaded bySean Choudhury
- CERIG RBE3 RIGID184Uploaded byBalaji Modepalli
- Lab de Termodinamica nO 3Uploaded byedja5
- Coupled Simulation of Convection Section With Dual Stage Steam Feed Mixin of an Industrial Ethylene Cracking FurnaceUploaded byperules
- Numerical and experimental studies of nonlinear wave loads of shipsUploaded byrammi4978
- Parabolic Laminar Profile Derivation (Please Read)Uploaded byFaThoRoYa
- Frederick Bloom - Handbook of Thin Plate Buckling and Postbuckling.pdfUploaded byJosé Manuel Rosas González
- Advanced strength of materials paper modelUploaded bydurgaraokamireddy
- Test - Unit 3 - Energy and MomentumUploaded byascd_msvu
- Rectangular TankUploaded byhardik pandya
- CHAPTER 2 LEFM Edited31Mac2014Uploaded bywandee2393