Engineering Fracture Mechanics Vol. 50, No. I, pp.

103-110, 1995
Elsevier Science Ltd
Pergamon 0013-7944(94)00141-3 Printed in Great Britain.

FRACTURE MECHANICS OF THE ANGLED ELLIPTIC

CRACK UNDER UNIAXIAL TENSION

HSIEN-YANG YEHt
Mechanical Engineering Department, California State University at Long Beach, Long Beach, CA 90840,
U.S.A.

CHANG H. KIM
Aerospace Engineering Department, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1191,
U.S.A.

Abstract--The behavior of the polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) plate with an elliptic crack under
uniaxial tensile stress is investigated. The direction of fracture propagation and the critical stress which
causes the fracture initiation are predicted and compared with experimental data available in the literature.
The Yeh-Stratton criterion is applied to the said problem in the form of the maximum principal stress
theory by utilizing the exact stress field around the elliptical cavity.

INTRODUCTION
FRACTURE mechanics is a science of material behavior when a large flaw or crack is present in the
body of interest. Specifically, two types of crack models, the silt and elliptic crack models, have
attracted many investigators for the last few decades. Both experimental and theoretical studies
with various assumptions and fracture criteria have been published in the literature on this
subject [1-24].
The main focus of the fracture mechanics in [1-24] is to predict the critical stress and the
fracture angle. Since a crack of any kind leads to a rise in local stress concentration, the critical
stress that causes fracture initiation generally shows a lower value than the measured fracture
strength of the uncracked body of the same material. The measurement of the direction of the initial
crack extension represents the fracture angle. This is widely known as the angled crack problem.
Fracture mechanics of the angled crack problem as a part of the failure analysis can be studied
in three steps. First, it is essential that the stress analysis must be performed as exactly as possible.
Without the reliable stress field acting on a body, it is impossible to continue the analysis further.
The primary interest of the stress analysis of the fracture mechanics is restricted to calculating the
stresses at the immediate vicinity of the crack because the region near the crack is most likely to
fail or fracture first due to the high stress concentration.
As soon as the stress state at a point of a body is disclosed, the point of interest will be
examined next with a failure criterion to determine whether the point is failed or not. A significant
error may be accompanied when a failure theory for a ductile material is used for a brittle material.
Thus, a caution must be provided in selecting an appropriate theory for a given material.
The third step is to calculate the failure or the fracture angle. A good theory of failure or
fracture must be able to provide reliable angles of failure or fracture. Such a theory is introduced
by the authors [25], and it is referred to as the Yeh-Stratton criterion, simply called the Y-S
criterion. The Y-S criterion is based on the yielding of a homogeneous, isotropic, and linearly
elastic material. The failure or yielding surface of the Y-S criterion is shown to be bounded and
closed. The Y-S criterion is also designed to work for both ductile and brittle materials, and
predicts the zone of failure well which eventually defines the failure angles for all the simple tests
such as the simple tension, compression, and torsion tests.
The objective of this paper is to apply the Y-S criterion to the angled elliptic crack problem
of simple uniaxial tensile load although the Y-S criterion is developed originally for a uncracked
body. This may sound alarming, but any criterion based on the continuum mechanics must be

tAuthor to whom correspondence should be addressed.

103
104 HSIEN-YANG YEH and CHANG H. KIM

applicable to a cracked or uncracked body in the valid range of the continuum mechanics. Thus,
there shouldn't be any difference when applying the Y-S criterion to a cracked or uncracked body
as long as the exact stress field at the possible failure sites in the continuum is provided.

STRESS ANALYSIS

An infinite plate containing an elliptic crack under biaxial loading is shown in Fig. 1. The angle
B between the vertical axis of loading and the major axis of the elliptic cavity is known as the
inclined angle of the crack, and the angle 0 represents the fracture angle measured from the major
axis of the elliptic cavity. The semimajor and the semiminor axis of the elliptic cavity will be denoted
as a and b, respectively. The k is the horizontal load parameter. If k = 0, the case of the uniaxial
tensile loading is presented.
The elliptic coordinate system (~, r/) is adopted in the analysis, and the corresponding stress
element is shown in Fig. 2. The axes representing the elliptic cavity are the x and y axis. The relation
between the elliptical and Cartesian coordinates are shown as follows,
x = c cosh ~ cos r/
y = c sinh ~ sin ~/,
where c is the positive number which has a simple relation between the semimajor and the
semiminor axis: c2= a 2 - b 2. The two coordinates, ~ and r/, represent ellipses and hyperbolas,
respectively. Thus at a constant value of ~ = ~0, the elliptic cavity can be defined if a = c cosh ~0
and b = c sinh ~0-
The exact stresses for the homogeneous, isotropic, and linearly elastic plate with an elliptic
crack under biaxial loading is available from ref. [16].

a~ + a¢ = B + 2 (A sinh 2~ - C sin 2r/) (1)

O"

Y 0

kc

Fig. 1. The configuration of the angled elliptic crack problem.

 The angled elliptic crack under uniaxial tension I05

rl=eOnstant

{=constant

Fig. 2. The elliptic coordinates and the stress element.

a, - a t _ 2 [cosh 2(4 - 40) - 1](B cos 2 r / + C sin 2q)

o"

+ 2 (cosh 240 - cos 2q)[B + 2 (A sihh2~ - C sin 2q)] (2)

2~,
- (C + 2B sin 2r/)sinh 2(~ - 40) + 2C sinh 24 [cosh 2(4 - 40) - 1]
O"

+ ), 2(cosh 24 - cosh 2{o)(A sin 2 r / + C sihh2{), (3)

where
2 = (cosh 24 - cos 217)-J
A = m - ne 2¢° cos 2/~
B = n e 2¢° cos 2/~
C = n e 2¢° sin 28
m=l+k
n=l-k.
T h e stress field equations shown a b o v e are m o r e c o m p a c t forms of the stress field equations
given in [23]. These stresses will be substituted later into the Y - S criterion for examination o f
possible failure or fracture sites in the continuum.
T h e stress field along the elliptic crack surface can n o w be found by substituting ¢ = 40 into
eqs (1)-(3), and it can be verified that the cavity is traction-free: a t = z~, = 0.
F r o m our experiences, m o s t likely failure or fracture would initiate f r o m or in the vicinity of
the crack where the stress concentration is very high. Thus, the stress field near the crack will be
o f natural interest here. Unlike the silt model, the elliptic model does not have a singular point
in the c o n t i n u u m , and thus, the stress field a r o u n d the elliptical cavity is expected to be m o r e
continuous.

FRACTURE CRITERIONmTHE YEH--STRATTON CRITERION

T h e m a i n functions o f a failure or fracture criterion are to c o m p a r e the experimentally
m e a s u r e d value to the c o m p u t e d value and m a k e a decision whether a point o f the b o d y in question
106 H S I E N - Y A N G YEH and C H A N G H. KIM

is fractured or not. It is believed that the fracture occurs when the measured and computed values
are equal.
Among several theories of failure for isotropic materials, the maximum principal stress theory,
the maximum shear stress theory, and the distortional energy theory are well-known classical
theories. These theories can be utilized to predict the failure or the fracture load with a given stress
state at a point of a body, but none of the theories predicts the failure or fracture angles for both
ductile and brittle materials in simple tension, compression, and torsion like the Y-S criterion does.
In fact, some of the classical theories can be shown to be the special cases of the Y-S criterion.
Since the stresses near the crack under the uniaxial tensile load are calculated to be mostly
tensile stresses and the material is assumed to be ideally brittle, only the tensile portion of the Y-S
criterion for brittle materials is repeated here from [25] for our analysis purpose. The principal stress
coordinate system is adopted in the Y-S criterion such that 0-, >/0-2 >/0-3.
First define 0-co which represents the average of the maximum and the minimum principal
stresses,

o1 + 0"3 (4)
acc = 2

According to the Y-S criterion, the material will fracture if one of the following is met.

(Case 1) I f ~0-ft- ~< 0-= ~< a11

0-~ = 1 (5)
0-11

(Case 2) I f 0 ~ < 0 - ~ < 2

0"10"3
t- a-! + 0-3 1, (6)
T2 0-tt 0-11

where 0-11and rf are the fracture strengths from the simple tension and torsion tests, respectively.
It is noted that the Y-S criterion shown above is not affected by the compressive fracture strength
when the body is in tension. Therefore, one main feature of the Y-S criterion is in its ability to
change the format depending upon what types of stresses (tensile or compressive) are applied to
the body and what types of materials (ductile or brittle) are being considered.
The stress field as shown in eqs (1)-(3) must be expressed in the principal stress coordinates
in order to operate the Y-S criterion. Thus, by transforming the stress field into the principal stress
coordinate system,

0-p,,p2 = 2 --- 2 + *~"

0-p3= 0 for plane stress (7)
0-p3= # (0-, + 0-2) =/~ (0-¢+ 0-,) for plane strain,
where/~ is the Poisson's ratio, and o-p,, 0-p2and o"p3are principal stresses which must be arranged
in order. However, for the plane stress problem, 0-i = 0-pi (i = 1, 2, 3) and 0-, >1 0-2/> 0-3.
Since a thin infinite plate is considered throughout the analysis, the angled crack problem in
this paper can be treated as a plane stress problem. After substituting 0-3 0 into eqs (5) and (6),
=

the Y-S criterion finally reduces to the single equation of,

0-_!=1 for 0~<0-¢¢~<aft (8)

0-ft
for the entire tensile part of the stress space. Equation (8) has the identical form of the maximum
principal stress theory. As expected, the Y-S criterion is in fact reduced to the maximum principal
stress theory for the brittle material under the tensile load. Equation (8) may be referred to as the
 The angled ellipticcrack under uniaxial tension 107

fracture condition which will be used to locate the possible fracture sites or points, and to compute
the fracture or the critical stress in the continuum of the polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) plate
in the next section. The point which establishes the fracture condition first in the continuum will
be defined as the fracture point.
Referring to eq. (8) again, it can be concluded that the fracture initiates when the maximum
principal stress reaches the fracture strength of the simple tension test at the possible fracture point.

ANGLE OF FRACTURE
As discussed in the introduction, a scheme for a fracture angle analysis must be developed once
the fracture condition is established. For example, it is generally known for the maximum principal
stress theory that fracture will initiate along the plane perpendicular to the maximum principal
stress for the brittle materials in tension. This is however verified with the Y-S criterion in [25].
Thus, the fracture angle analysis and the fracture condition for the Y-S criterion and the maximum
principal stress theory for brittle materials are shown to be identical. Since the fracture criterion
(which consists of the fracture condition and the fracture angle analysis) depends on the stress field,
the fracture angle must also be determined from the stress state of the fracture point.
The PMMA plates with the elliptic cavities of the nominal semimajor axis of 0.5 in. (12.7 mm)
and the semiminor axis of 0.1 in. (2.5 mm) are considered in the analysis. These specifications are
especially selected for direct comparison with the experimental results reported by Wu et al. [21].
Since only the tangential stress exists along the traction-free cavity, the tangential stress is the
principal stress, and the point where the tangential stress G is maximum along the elliptic cavity
will be defined as the fracture point according to eq. (8). The initiation of the fracture is assumed
in the plane perpendicular to the maximum tangential stress which is parallel to the cavity.
After substituting the principal stresses of eqs (1)-(3) into the fracture condition, eq. (8), the
fracture condition must be checked for - 9 0 ° ~<r/~< 90 ° along the traction-free cavity at ~ = 40. It
is convenient to use the input value of a = 1 throughout the analysis because the calculated internal
stresses will be proportional to the input value. For k = 0 and 1~ = 45 degrees, the initial fracture
point is found at r / = - 6.27 degrees. The location of the fracture point on the surface of the elliptic
cavity is given by ( x , y ) = (0.4974, -0.01116) in Cartesian coordinates. It is observed that the
initiation of the fracture does not always start from the tip of the cavity (x, y) = (0.5, 0) unlike the
silt crack model. The angle of fracture is now computed to be -28.3 degrees from the x axis of
the cavity which is underestimated. The negative angle represents that the angle is measured
counterclockwise.
The prediction of the initial fracture angle by the Y-S criterion or the maximum principal
stress theory would be similar to those analyses performed by Maugis [16] and Chang[24] for
r/a = 0. However, these initial plots tend to underestimate the experimental values of the fracture
angles. Thus, Maugis [16] was concerned that the fracture angle must have been measured at a small
distance away from the crack. When the fracture angle analyses were performed at r/a = 0.10 and
0.15 from the initial fracture point on the boundary of the cavity, the theoretical result of the
fracture angle was improved. Thus, the current fracture analysis must be extended into the region
near the elliptic cavity by increasing the small value of ~ coordinate.
With the same parameters above, another calculation is carried out at a small distance away
from the boundary of the cavity. Similarly, the fracture condition along the different ellipse is now
checked for - 90 ° ~<q ~<90° at ~ = 40 + A~. For A¢ = 0.1 radians a n d / / = 45 degrees, the fracture
point is found at r / = -9.23 degrees. The stresses at the fracture point and the corresponding
principal stress states are computed and shown in Fig. 3. The angle 0~ in Fig. 3 is due to the location
of the fracture point with respect to the x axis, and the angle 02 represents the principal direction
of the stress element at the fracture point with respect to the angle 0~. The sum of two angles, 0~
and 02, represents the final fracture angle which is calculated to be approximately -42.8 °. This
approximation is in good agreement with the experiments.
Figures 4 and 5 show the plots of the fracture angle and the normalized fracture stress as a
function of the crack angle, respectively. The fracture stresses are normalized with the computed
fracture stress at /3 = 90 °. The theoretical results are compared with the experimental results

EFM 50/I--H
108 HSIEN-YANG YEH and CHANG H. KIM

offil

.........--_ ~[]-=45deg.

( i i ~ ~ ~ / i " ~F.ractu!Point

apl;3"7945 ~lure Plane

Fig. 3. The stress state of the fracture point along the ellipse at ~ = 40+ 0.1.

90 , i , , , J

80 ~ o Experimentaldata for PMMA [21]

70 "~'~i"~ 1. Solid Line: Delta=0

tm 60

0,o
50

40

30

20

10

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
The crack angle (degrees)
Fig. 4. The fracture angle vs the crack angle.
 The angled elliptic crack under uniaxial tension 109

2 6

@ 4- .ii'"""',
e~

2 --7.:.:%:..:....

o ' ; . . . . ;
0 10 2 40 50 60 70 8 90
The crackangle (degrees)
Fig. 5. The normalized fracture stress vs the crack angle.

provided by Wu et al. [21]. In general, the results are shown to be in good agreements. It is observed
from Fig. 4 that the prediction of the fracture angle, which the analysis is performed at the small
distance away from the traction-free cavity, provides better agreements with the experimental data.
This is due to the sufficient shear stress z¢, present in the element at the small distance away from
the cavity. This shear stress eventually deflects the crack path severely.

CONCLUSION
In the present analysis, the behavior of the P M M A plate with the elliptic crack is examined
with the Yeh-Stratton criterion in the form of the maximum principal stress theory. One main
difference between the Y-S criterion and other well-known fracture criteria is that the fracture angle
in the Y-S criterion is calculated from the stress state of the fracture point, whereas in most other
fracture criteria, the fracture angle is referenced to some point in the continuum, for example, the
tip of the crack for the silt crack model or the initial fracture point on the traction-free surface
for the elliptic crack model. Thus, such fracture criteria may not be applicable to a uncracked body
for there is no crack.
The study of the elliptic crack model is quite important. It isn't just because of the shape of
the elliptic crack embedded in the body. In fact, the study of the elliptic crack model can also be
applicable to the silt crack model when the tip of the silt crack may become blunt under the external
load at the elevated temperature before it fractures.
The current fracture analysis of the elliptic crack model showed good agreements in fracture
angle and fracture stress calculations with the experiments. It is also observed that the fracture
angle is best analyzed at the small distance away from the elliptic cavity. The fact that the crack
doesn't always propagate from the tip of the crack was observed and computed.

REFERENCES
[1] F. Erdogan and G. C. Sih, On the crack extension in plates under plane loading and transverse shear. J. bas. Engng
85D, 519 527 (1963).
[2] F. A. McClintock, Discussion on "On the crack extension in plates under plane loading and transverse shear" by F.
Erdogan and G. C. Sih. J. bas. Engng $5D, 525-527 (1963).
[3] G. C. Sih, Mechanics o f Fracture Initiation and Propagation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Culembourg, The
Netherlands (1991).
110 HSIEN-YANG YEH and CHANG H. KIM

[4] K. Palaniswamy and W. G. Knauss, Propagations of a crack under general in-plane tension. Int. J.Fracture Mech.
8, 114-117 (1972).
[5] M. A. Hussain, S. L. Pu and J. Underwood, Strain energy release rate for a crack under combined mode-I and -II.
A S T M STP 560, 2-28 (1974).
[6] G. C. Sih, Some basic problems in fracture mechanics and new concepts. Engng Fracture Mech. 5, 365-377 (1973).
[7] K. J. Chang, On the maximum strain criterion--a new approach to the angled crack problem. Engng Fracture Mech.
14, 107-124 (1981).
[8] P. S. Theocaris and N. P. Andrianopoulos, The T-criterion applied to ductile fracture. Int. J. Fracture Mech. 20,
R125-R130 (1982).
[9] S. K. Maiti and R. A. Smith, Comparison of the criteria for mixed mode brittle fracture based on the preinstability
stress-strain field--I. Slit and elliptical cracks under uniaxial tensile loading. Int. J. Fracture Mech. 23, 281-295 (1983).
[10] G. A. Papadopoulos, New concepts on the Det.-criterion. Engng Fracture Mech. 32, 351-360 (1989).
[11] J. M. Koo and Y. S. Choy, A new mixed mode fracture criterion: maximum tangential strain energy density criterion.
Engng Fracture Mech. 39, 443-449 (1991).
[12] N. A. B. Yehia, Distortional strain energy density criterion: the Y-criterion. Engng Fracture Mech. 39, 477-485 (1991).
[13] X. Yan, Z. Zhang and S. Du, Mixed-mode fracture criteria for the materials with different yield strengths in tension
and compression. Engng Fracture Mech. 42, 109-116 (1992).
[14] J. Eftis, N. Subramonian and H. Liebowitz, Crack border stress and displacement equations revisited. Engng Fracture
Mech. 9, 189-210 (1977).
[15] J. Eftis and N. Subramonian, The inclined crack under biaxial load. Engng Fracture Mech. 10, 43-67 (1978).
[16] D. Maugis, Stresses and displacements around cracks and elliptical cavities: exact solutions. Engng Fracture Mech. 43,
217-255 (1992).
[17] J. J. Kibler and R. Roberts, The effect of biaxial stresses on fatigue and fracture. J. Engng Ind. 727-734 (1970).
[18] Y. Ueda, K. Ikeda, T. Yao, M. Aoki, T. Yoshie and T. Shirakura, Brittle Fracture initiation characteristics under
biaxial loading. Proc. Fracture 1977 (Vol. 2, pp. 173-182) ICF4, Waterloo, Canada (1977).
[19] P. D. Ewing and J. G. Williams, The fracture of spherical shells under pressure and circular tubes with angled cracks
in torsion. Int. J. Fracture Mech. 10, 537-544 (1974).
[20] K. J. Chang, A further examination on the application of the strain energy density theory to the angled crack problem.
J. appl. Mech. 49, 377-382 (1982).
[21] H. C. Wu, R. F. Yao and M. C. Yip, Experimental investigation of the angled elliptic notch problem in tension. J. appl.
Mech. 44, 455-461 (1977).
[22] H. C.Wu and K. J. Chang, Angled elliptic notch problem in compression and tension. J. appl. Mech. 45, 258-262
(1978).
[23] K. J. Chang and W. C. Wu, Angled elliptic notch problem under biaxial loading. J. appl. Mech. 47, 57-63 (1980).
[24] K. J. Chang, Further studies of the maximum stress criterion on the angled crack problem. Engng Fracture Mech. 14,
125-247 (1981).
[25] C. H. Kim and H.-Y. Yeh, Development of a new yielding criterion: the Yeh-Stratton criterion. Engng Fracture Mech.
47, 569-582 (1994).

(Received 7 August 1993)