Introduction to Fracture Mechanics

From Suresh: Fatigue of Materials

1
 INTRODUCTION
Importance of Fracture Mechanics :
 All real materials contain defects: understand
the influence of these defects on the strength of
the material. Defect-tolerant design philosophy.
 Relevance for Fatigue: understand the initiation
and growth of fatigue cracks.

We will use two approaches, an energy-based

approach and a more rigorous mechanics approach.
2
 Introduction
Griffith Fracture Theory
Key Idea : Griffith (1921) postulated that for unit
crack extension to occur under the influence of the
applied stress, the decrease in potential energy of
the system, by virtue of the displacement of the
outer boundaries and the change in the stored elastic
energy, must equal the increase in surface energy
due to crack extension.

3
Consider the center-cracked plate shown below.
The in-plane dimensions of the plate are large
compared to the crack length.

4
 Using the results of Inglis (1913) Griffith found that
the net change in potential energy of the plate caused
by the introduction of the crack is:
a  B
2 2
WP   .
E'
E
E' Plane strain
1 v 2

=E Plane stress
The surface energy of the crack system is
WS  4aB s
where γS is the free surface energy per unit surface area.
5
The total system energy is then given by

a  B 2 2
U  W P  WS    4aB S .
E'
Griffith noted that the critical condition for the onset
of crack growth is:
dU dWP dWS a 2
    2 S  0,
dA dA dA E'

6
 where A=2aB is the crack area and dA denotes an
incremental increase in the crack area.
Thus the stress required to initiate fracture is:

2E ' S
f  .
a

As the second derivative, d2U/da2 is negative, the

above equilibrium condition gives rise to unstable
crack propagation. This applies for brittle materials;
it must be modified for ductile materials such as metals.
7
Orowan (1952) extended Griffith’s brittle fracture
concept to metals by simply adding a term representing
plastic energy dissipation. The resultant expression
for fracture initiation is

2E ' ( s   p )
 f  ,
a
where  p is the plastic work per unit area of surface
created. Generally  p is much larger than  s .

8
 Crack Driving Force
Energy Release Rate
Consider an elastic plate with an edge crack of length
a, as shown below:

9
The total mechanical potential energy of a cracked
elastic body is given by the general expression
W P    wF

where  is the stored elastic strain energy and wF is

the work done by the external forces.

Irwin (1956) proposed an approach for the

characterization of the driving force for fracture in
cracked bodies, which is conceptually equivalent to
that of the Griffith model.
10
Irwin introduced, for this purpose, the energy release
rate G which is defined as

dWP
G  .
d
WP, and thus G, can be evaluated for different loading
conditions. This definition is valid for both linear and
nonlinear elastic deformation of the body. G is a function
of the load (or displacement) and crack length. It is
independent of the boundary conditions, in particular
whether the loading is fixed-displacement or fixed-load.
11
The Griffith criterion for fracture initiation in an ideally
brittle solid can be re-phrased in terms of G such that
 2 a
G   2 S .
'

We define the compliance C (inverse of the stiffness) of

a cracked solid as C=u / F. It can be shown that
F 2 dC
G  .
2 B da
Thus measurements of compliance as a function of crack
length allow the energy release rate to be evaluated.
12
 Modes of Fracture
The three basic modes of separation of the crack
surfaces (modes of fracture) are depicted below:

Combinations of modes (mixed-mode loading) are

also possible.
13
 Modes of Fracture Definitions

Mode I (tensile opening mode): The crack faces

separate in a direction normal to the plane of the crack.
The displacements are symmetric with respect to
the x – z and x – y planes.

Mode II (in-plane sliding mode): The crack faces

are mutually sheared in a direction normal to the
crack front. The displacements are symmetric with
respect to the x – y plane and anti-symmetric with
respect to the x – z plane.
14
 Definitions
Modes of Fracture
Mode III (tearing or anti-plane shear mode): The
crack faces are sheared parallel to the crack front.
The displacements are antisymmetric with respect
to the x – y and x – z planes.

The crack face displacements in modes II and III

find an analogy to the motion of edge dislocations
and screw dislocations, respectively.

15
 Plane Crack Problem

The preceding analysis considered fracture from an

energy standpoint. We now carry out a linear elastic
stress analysis of the cracked body, which will
allow us to formulate critical conditions for the
growth of flaws more precisely. An analysis of this
type falls within the field of Linear Elastic
Fracture Mechanics (LEFM).

16
We consider a semi-infinite crack in an infinite plate
of an isotropic and homogeneous solid as shown below:

Our goal is to develop expressions for the stresses,

strains and displacements around the crack tip.

17
 Equilibrium Equations
Plane Crack Problem
The equilibrium equations (no body forces) are
 rr 1  r  rr   
   0,
r r  r

 r 1   2 r
   0,
r r  r
where r and  are the polar coordinates as shown
previously.

18
 Strain-Displacement
Plane Crack Problem
The strain-displacement relations for polar coordinates
are: u u 1 u
 rr  r
,    r
 
,
r r r 

1  1 ur u u 
 r     .
2  r  r r 
The strain compatibility equation in polar coordinates is:

   2   1   r
2 2
1   r 1  2 rr 1  rr
   2  2   0.
r 2
r r r r  r  r  2
r r

19
 Hooke’s Law
Plane Crack Problem
Hooke’s Law (for plane stress,  zz  0):
E rr   rr   ,
E      rr ,
2G r  G r   r .
For the case of plane strain ( zz  0):
2G rr  1   rr   ,
2G   1     rr ,
2G r   r . 20
 Airy Stress Function
Plane Crack Problem
For the plane problem, the equations of equilibrium are
satisfied when the stress components are expressed by
x
the Airy stress function through
1 x 1 2x 2x
 rr   2 ,   ,
r r r  2
r 2

  1 x 
 r   .
r  r  
Using these definitions for the stresses and Hooke’s
law, the strains can be expressed in terms of . x 21
It can be shown that the compatibility equation, when
expressed in terms of the Airy stress function, satisfies
the biharmonic equation:
 1  1 
 
2 2
    0,   2 
2 2 2
 2 .
r r r r  2

The boundary conditions for this plane crack problem

are:     r  0 for    .
These conditions express the fact that the crack is
traction-free (no loads applied to crack face).
Note: there is no condition on  rr .
22
A choice of the Airy stress function for the present
crack problem should be such that x has a singularity
at the crack tip, and is single-valued. We try a solution
of the form:
  r p r ,    q r ,  ,
2

Where p and p are harmonic functions of r and θ

(i.e.  2 p  0 and  2 q  0).

Now consider a separate solution,   Rr  , of

the following form (Williams, 1957):

23
  
p  A1 r cos   A2 r sin  ,
q  B1 r   2 
cos  2   B2 r  2
sin   2  .
This form leads to the following expression for x:
xr A1 cos   B1 cos  2  
  2 

r   2 
A2 sin   B2 sin   2  .
Note that we have expressed x as a symmetric part and
an anti-symmetric part. The symmetric part provides
the Mode I solution while the anti-symmetric part
provides the Mode II solution. We will derive the
Mode I solution here.
24
 2
  
r 2

   2   1r A1 cos   B1 cos  2  



  1 rx 
 r   
r  r  

   1r A1 sin     2 B1 sin   2 



Apply the boundary conditions:

 A1  B1  cos   0,

A1    2B1 sin   0.

25
 2Z  1
The admissible cases are: (i) cos λ π = 0,hence  
2
where Z is an integer including zero, and thus
B1= A1λ /(λ + 2) or (ii) sin λπ = 0 and hence λ = Z and
B1= A1. Since the governing equations are linear, any
linear combination of the admissible solutions provides
a solution, hence λ can have any satisfying:
Z
 ,
2

Where Z is a positive or negative integer, including zero.

26
Out of all the possible values of λ, how do we decide
the appropriate value of λ?
The value of λ cannot be found from any mathematical
argument. We need to use a physical, based on the total
strain energy around the crack tip. From the expressions

for the stresses,  ij ~ r and  ij ~ r . Therefore the


strain energy density is given by

1 2
   ij  ij ~ r .
2

27
The total strain energy within an annular region,with
inner and outer radii r0 and R, respectively, centered at
the crack tip, with unit thickness is
2 R 1 2 R
 2  1
 r0 2 ij ij rdrd ~ 0  r drd .
0 r0

We assert that the strain energy should be bounded

(Φ < ∞) as r00. Using this physical argument, we
see that λ > -1. (λ = 1 gives  ij  0). If λ < 1, the
strain energy will not be bounded.

28
 Thus the physically admissible values of λ are
1 1 3 Z
   , 0, , 1, , 2, ..., (or )   ,
2 2 2 2
where Z is –1, 0, or a positive integer. Taking the most
dominant singular term (λ =  1/2 and thus B1=A1/3)
we find that:
  1 3 
  r A1 cos  cos    r   r 2  
3
2
2 3 2
2 

5


 


~ijI     ij r 0    ij r 1 / 2   .....
1
 ij  A1 r 2

29
The higher order terms, with exponents greater than
zero, vanish as r  0. We write A1  K I / 2 where
KI is the stress intensity factor.
Thus we have that:
KI
 ij   ij     ix  jx .
~ I

2r
The first term is the leading singular term for linear elastic
mode I crack problems. ~ijI is a function of θ alone (no r
dependence). The second term, generally referred to as the
‘T term’, is a non-singular term which can be important in
some situations involving fatigue.  ij is the Kronecker
delta function.
30
From Hooke’s law, the strains are linearly related to
the stresses so that
KI
 ij  .
2r
Since the strains are calculated from the
displacement gradient,

KI KI
ui  r r.
2r 2

31
 Stress Intensity Factors
Plane Crack Problem
The stress intensity factors for Modes I, II and III are
defined as follows:
K I  lim
r 0
 2r   0  ,
yy

K II  lim 2r   0  ,
xy
r 0

K III  lim 2r   0  .

yz
r 0
The stress intensity factor K depends on loading and geometry.
Many different geometries have been evaluated, either
analytically or numerically, and are available in the literature,
e.g., Compendium of Stress Intensity Factors, D. P. Rooke.
32
 Plane Crack Problem Similitude
For a crack of length 2a1 in an infinite plate, subjected
to an applied stress σ1 the stress intensity factor is
known to be K I   1 a1 . Consider two large plates, one
with a center crack of length 2a1, the other with a center
crack of length 2a2. A stress σ1 is applied to the first
plate, and a stress σ2 is applied to the second plate. If
we choose σ1, σ1, σ2 and σ2 so that K I  K I then the
(1) ( 2)

fields at the crack tip are identical in both cases. This

is the principle of similitude, which is very important in
fracture mechanics as it allows results from laboratory
scale tests to be applied to large scale fracture problems.
33
 Stress Intensity Factors
Plane Crack Problem
How do we apply this analysis to the failure of actual
materials? It has been found experimentally that when
the stress intensity factor K (which depends on the
geometry and loading) attains a critical value KC (a
material property) the crack begins to grow, i.e., the
critical condition for the onset of fracture is
K → Kc.
The condition can also be expressed in terms of the
energy release rate, i.e., ς → ςc.
What are some typical values for KC?
34
Material Kc (MPa m )
Glass 1
Al2O3  34
Si3 N4  48
Polymers  0.5  2
Al alloys  10  100
Steels  30  300

35
 Fracture Mechanics #2:

Role of Crack Tip Plasticity

1
 Estimate
Plastic Zone Size
Consider inelastic and permanent deformation at the
crack tip (stresses are too high for the material to
remain elastic).
First order estimate of plastic zone size:
Assume: plane stress, and the material behavior is
elastic-perfectly plastic. Set the stress σyy= σys
(along the line θ = 0).
K1
 yy    ys
2r *
p
2
 K 2
 a 2
r 
*
p
1

2 ys 2 ys
2 2

Where we have used the result that for a semi-infinite

crack in a very large plate K I    a.
What about the details of the plastic zone shape? The
shape of the plastic zone is obtained by examining the
yield condition, in conjunction with asymptotic K-field
results, for all angles θ around the crack tip. Either the
Mises or the Tresca criterion can be applied.

3
 Plastic Zone Shape
Recall that for the Tresca yield condition yielding
occurs when  max   ys / 2 .
We will use the Mises yield condition. The Mises
condition in terms of principal stresses is given as

 1   2  2
  2   3    3   1   2
2 2 2
ys

where σ y s is the uniaxial yield stress. (For a tension

test, σ2= σ3=0, σ1= σys ).

4
On the plane θ = 0, σxy= 0 and thus σxx and σyy are the
principal stresses σ1 and σ2. The stresses σ z ≡ σ3; σz =0
for plane stress, σ z = ν(σ xx + σ yy) for plane strain.
However, in general the shear stress σ xy is not zero and
the principal stresses σ1 and σ2 cannot be determined so
easily.
The principal stresses σ1 and σ2 are evaluated as follows
(can use Mohr’s circle, for example):
2
 xx   yy   xx   yy 
 1,  2       xy
2

2  2 
5
Substitute the known expression for σ xx, σ yy and σ xy
in the Mode I crack problem (derived last time) and
find that:
KI  
1  cos 1  sin 
2r 2 2

KI  
2  cos 1  sin 
2r 2 2

KI 
 3  2 cos (plane strain); σ3= 0 (plane stress).
2r 2
6
Substitute in to the Mises yield condition:
Plane strain:

2
K 3 2 
I
 sin   1  2  2
1  cos    2 2

2r  2
ys

Plane stress:
2
K  3 2 
1  sin   cos   2 ys
I 2

2r  2 
7
These expressions can be used to solve for the radius
of the plastic zone rp as a function of θ:

Plane strain:
2
1  KI  3 2 
rp            
2
sin  1  2 1  cos
4    2 
 ys 

Plane stress:
2
1  KI   3 2 
rp     
1  2 sin   cos 
4  
 ys 
8
Check: We note that the Plane Stress case reduces to
our first order estimate for θ = 0.

Also note that (KI/ σys)2 has dimensions of length.

Next we will compare the extent of the plastic zone

in the two situations, plane stress and plane strain,
for two cases, θ = 0 and θ = 45˚.

9
 1
For θ = 0,   ,
3
rp  plane strain  1

rp  plane stress  9
1
For θ = 45˚,   ,
3
rp  plane strain  1
 0.381 
rp  plane stress  2.8

Extent of the plastic zone is significantly larger for the

plane stress case.
10
 Plane stress/plane strain
Plastic Zone Shape

11
Plastic Zone Shape Plane stress/plane strain

12
 Engineering Formulae
Plastic Zone Size
For Plane Stress: 2
1  K I 

rp 
   ys 

For Plane Strain:
2
1  KI 
rp   
3  
 ys 
Similar analyses can be done to determine the plastic
zone size and shape for Mode II and Mode III loading.
13
 Plane stress/plane strain
Specimen Thickness Effects

Thickness B 14
 Meaning of ς
Recall the Strain Energy Release Rate ς .
What does it physically represent? It is the rate of
decrease of the total potential energy with respect to
crack length (per unit thickness of crack front),i.e.
 PE 
 
a
What is the connection between ς and K?

15
For Mode I:

Plane Stress:
2
K
 I

E
Plane Strain:
2

K
E
I

1  2


16
For the general 3-D case, plane strain and anti-plane
strain loading:

K K 2 2
1  2

E

1  
2 

E

K  
For the plane stress case (combination Mode I and
Mode II):
K K 2 2
  

E
17
 Domain of validity
K Dominance
There exists an annular zone where the K solution
is valid:

The inner radius is given by rp (plastic zone size).

18
The outer radius, r0, is the radial distance at which
the approximate, asymptotic singular solutions
deviate significantly (say, by more than 10%)
from full elasticity solutions which include higher
order terms. It is found that,

r0  0.1a

where a is the crack length.

19
 Size Requirements
Example Problem
Consider a low strength steel with σys=350 MPa,
KIc=250 MPa m and E = 210 GPa. What are the
Minimum specimen size requirements for a valid
KIc measurement?

20
 Size Requirements
Example Problem
KIc Test
ASTM standard E399 (1974) for KIc testing (specimen
dimensions large compared to plastic zone):
2
 K Ic 
a, b, B  2.5 
 
 ys 
Substitute the known values for σys and KIc. Find that

a, b, B  1.28 m!  50 inches 
21