International Journal of Fracture 98: 243–261, 1999.

© 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous

orthotropic medium

MURAT OZTURK and FAZIL ERDOGAN

Department of Mechanical Engineering and Mechanics, Lehigh University, 19 Memorial Drive West,
Bethlehem, PA 18015, U.S.A.

Received 13 October 1997; accepted in revised form 23 April 1998

Abstract. The mixed mode crack problem in plane elasticity for a graded and oriented material is considered. The
material property grading is intentional, whereas the property orientation or orthotropy is usually the consequence
of material processing. It is assumed that the crack is located in a plane perpendicular to the direction of property
grading and the principal axes of orthotropy are parallel and perpendicular to the crack. The √ four independent
engineering constants E11 , E22 , G12 , and ν12 are replaced by a stiffness parameter, E = E11 E22 , a stiffness
√
ratio, δ = (E11 /E22 )1/4 , a Poisson’s ratio, ν = ν12 ν21 , and a shear parameter κ0 = (E/2G12 ) − ν. The
corresponding mixed boundary value problem is reduced to a system of integral equations which is solved for
various loading conditions and material parameters. The results presented consist of the strain energy release rate,
the stress intensity factors and the crack opening displacements. It is found that generally the stress intensity factors
increase with increasing material inhomogeneity parameter and shear parameter and with decreasing stiffness
ratio.

Key words: Inhomogeneous orthotropic materials, mixed mode crack problems, stress intensity factors, strain
energy release rate, crack opening displacement, graded materials.

1. Introduction

Within the past decade there has been a great deal of interest on the concept of material
property grading as a tool for new material design in certain advanced technology applications,
primarily in high temperature components, microelectronics and machine tools. Most of the
work in this area is concerned with metal/ceramic particulate composites with continuously
varying volume fractions. The main objective has been to combine such desirable properties
as strength, toughness and temperature, wear and corrosion resistance in a single material sys-
tem. Two important potential applications of the concept appear to be coatings and interfacial
zones. It has been shown that in these components grading the material composition reduces
the magnitude of processing related and thermally or mechanically induced stresses (Choules
and Kokini, 1993; Lee and Erdogan, 1995) and significantly increases the bonding strength
(Kurihara et al., 1990). A comprehensive review and discussion of the issues relating to the
processing, design and mechanics of the graded materials may be found in Yamanouchi et al.
(1990), Holt et al. (1993) and Ilschner and Cherradi (1995).
Generally, in coatings the subcritical crack growth and spallation-related failures involve
two types of cracking, namely a surface crack propagating perpendicular to the boundary
and an interface crack. This is partly due to the fact that because of the techniques used
in processing, the graded medium is seldom isotropic and the two crack planes mentioned
correspond to the principal planes of material orthotropy and consequently, to relatively weak
244 Murat Ozturk and Fazil Erdogan

Figure 1. Geometry and notation for mixed mode crack problem in an orthotropic inhomogeneous medium.

fracture planes. For example, the materials processed by using a plasma spray technique have
generally a lamellar structure. Flattened splats and relatively weak splat boundaries provide
an oriented material with higher stiffness and weak cleavage planes parallel to the boundary
(Sampath et al., 1995). On the other hand, graded materials processed by an electron beam
physical vapor deposition technique would invariably have a columnar structure, resulting
in a higher stiffness in thickness direction and weak fracture planes perpendicular to the
boundary (Kaysser and Ilschner, 1995). Clearly, in studying the mechanics of these materials
assuming the medium to be isotropic would not be very realistic and as a first approximation
one could assume that the graded material is orthotropic with principal directions parallel and
perpendicular to the boundary.
Since the material property grading is usually in thickness direction, and the residual and
thermal stresses are generally parallel to the boundary, in the first crack problem of interest,
namely in surface crack problem the plane of the crack is a plane of symmetry in material
properties and loading. Consequently, the problem is a mode I crack problem for an ortho-
tropic inhomogeneous medium. For an infinite medium this problem was recently considered
by Ozturk and Erdogan (1997). In the second problem of interest relating to spallation fracture,
the crack is located in a plane perpendicular to the direction of material property variation.
Therefore, the problem is inherently a mixed mode crack problem. In this study we consider
the basic mixed mode problem in plane elasticity for an orthotropic inhomogeneous medium
described in Figure 1. The main interest in this study is the influence of material orthotropy
and inhomogeneity on the stress intensity factors and crack opening displacements. The cor-
responding mode I and mixed mode crack problems for isotropic inhomogeneous planes were
previously considered by Delale and Erdogan (1983) and Konda and Erdogan (1994), respect-
ively. An extensive treatment of various mode I crack problems, including the surface crack,
for an isotropic graded coating bonded to a homogeneous isotropic substrate was recently
given by Kasmalkar (1996). The corresponding mixed mode problem for an interface crack
in the same isotropic coated material was considered by Chen and Erdogan (1996). Despite
the fact that fracture mechanics of graded materials is a very young field, the literature on the
subject is rather extensive. A comprehensive survey of the field is beyond the scope of this
 The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium 245

study. Among typical articles that contain references to previous research one may mention
the papers by Noda and Jin (1993), Jin and Noda (1994), Choi (1996), Gao (1991), Erdogan
(1995), Ozturk and Erdogan (1996a) and Erdogan and Wu (1996).

2. Formulation of the crack problem

Consider the crack problem for an orthotropic inhomogeneous medium described by Figure 1.
In the usual notation let ui and σij (i, j = 1, 2, 3) be the displacement and stress compon-
ents and Eii , Gij and νij (i, j = 1, 2, 3) be the engineering elastic constants ((νij /Eii ) =
(νj i /Ejj )). To simplify the equations of the plane elasticity we introduce the following aver-
aged constants (Krenk, 1979; Cinar and Erdogan, 1983).
p √ E11 ν12 E
E= E11 E22 , ν= ν12 ν21 , δ4 = = , κ0 = − ν, (1)
E22 ν21 2G12

for generalized plane stress and

s s
E11 E22 (ν12 + ν13 ν32 )(ν21 + ν23 ν31 )
E= , ν= ,
(1 − ν13 ν31 )(1 − ν23 ν32 ) (1 − ν13 ν31 )(1 − ν23 ν32 )

E11 (1 − ν23 ν32 ) E

δ4 = , κ0 = − ν, (2)
E22 (1 − ν13 ν31 ) 2G12
for plane strain. We also use the stiffness ratio δ to scale the independent and dependent
variables as
√ √ √
x = x1 / δ, y = x2 δ, u(x, y) = δu1 (x1 , x2 ),
√
v(x, y) = u2 (x1 , x2 )/ δ,

σxx (x, y) = σ11(x1 , x2 )/δ, σyy (x, y) = δσ22 (x1 , x2 ),

σxy (x, y) = σ12 (x1 , x2 ). (3)

In terms of the new variables the stress-displacement relations become

 
E ∗ (x, y) ∂ ∂
σxx (x, y) = u(x, y) + ν v(x, y) ,
1 − ν2 ∂x ∂y
 
E ∗ (x, y) ∂ ∂
σyy (x, y) = v(x, y) + ν u(x, y) ,
1 − ν2 ∂y ∂x
 
E ∗ (x, y) ∂ ∂
σxy (x, y) = u(x, y) + ν u(x, y) , (4)
2(κ0 + ν) ∂y ∂x
where

E ∗ (x, y) = E(x1 , x2 ). (5)

246 Murat Ozturk and Fazil Erdogan

The general problem with elastic parameters as arbitrary functions of x and y appears to
be analytically intractable. To simplify the problem we make two assumptions regarding the
distribution of the elastic parameters. First the material inhomogeneity is assumed to be such
that the variations in the stiffnesses E11 , E22 and G12 are proportional. The second assumption
is concerned with the Poisson’s ratio ν. The previous results indicate that the solution of the
crack problem in inhomogeneous materials are not very sensitive to ν. Consequently, in the
problem under consideration it may be assumed that ν is a constant throughout the medium.
These two assumptions imply that the parameters κ0 and δ as well as ν are independent of
x1 and x2 and the inhomogeneity in the medium is represented by E(x1 , x2 ). If the constants
κ0 , δ, ν and the function E(x1 , x2 ) are prescribed the physical parameters may be obtained
from
E11 (x1 , x2 ) = E(x1 , x2 )δ 2 , E22 (x1 , x2 ) = E(x1 , x2 )/δ 2 ,

E(x1 , x2 )
G12 (x1 , x2 ) = , ν12 = νδ 2 , ν21 = ν/δ 2 . (6)
2(κ0 + ν)
By substituting now from (4) into the equilibrium equations we obtain
  
∂ 2u ∂ 2u ∂ 2v 1 ∂E ∗ ∂u ∂v
+ β1 2 + β2 + ∗ β1 +ν
∂y 2 ∂x ∂x∂y E ∂x ∂x ∂y
 
∂E ∗ ∂u ∂v
+ + = 0,
∂y ∂y ∂x
  
∂ 2v ∂ 2v ∂ 2u 1 ∂E ∗ ∂u ∂v
+ β1 2 + β2 + ∗ +
∂x 2 ∂y ∂x∂y E ∂x ∂y ∂x
 
∂E ∗ ∂v ∂u
+β1 +ν = 0, (7)
∂y ∂y ∂x
where
2(κ0 + ν)
β1 = , β2 = 1 + νβ1 . (8)
1 − ν2
If we further assume that the material properties vary only in x2 direction and within that part
of the medium perturbed by the crack the function E may be approximated by1
√
E(x1 , x2 ) = E(x2 ) = E0 eαx2 = E ∗ (x, y) = E0 eγ y , γ = α/ δ, (9)
from (7) it may be seen that
 
∂ 2u ∂ 2u ∂ 2v ∂u ∂v
+ β1 + β2 +γ + = 0,
∂y 2 ∂x 2 ∂x∂y ∂y ∂x
 
∂ 2v ∂ 2v ∂ 2u ∂v ∂u
+ β1 + β2 + γβ1 + ν = 0. (10)
∂x 2 ∂y 2 ∂x∂y ∂y ∂x
1 The exponential variation in material properties used in this study is selected largely for mathematical
expediency. For a more general representation seem for example, Lee and Erdogan (1995).
 The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium 247

By solving the problem for the uncracked medium under the prescribed applied loads and
by using superposition, the problem for the cracked medium may be reduced to a perturbation
problem in which the crack surface tractions are the only nonzero external loads. Equations
(10) must then be solved under the following boundary and continuity conditions
σ22 (x1 , +0) = σ22 (x1 , −0), σ12 (x1 , +0) = σ12 (x1 , −0), −∞ < x1 < ∞, (11)
σ22 (x1 , +0) = σ0 (x1 ), σ12 (x1 , +0) = τ0 (x1 ), −a < x1 < a, (12)
u2 (x1 , +0) = u2 (x1 , −0), u1 (x1 , +0) = u1 (x1 , −0), −a < |x1 | < ∞. (13)
Expressing the solution of (10) as
Z ∞
1
u(x, y) = F (y, k) eikx dk,
2π −∞
Z ∞
1
v(x, y) = G(y, k) eikx dk, (14)
2π −∞

it may be shown that

X
4 X
4
F (y, k) = Cj (k)e mj y
, G(y, k) = bj (k)Cj (k)emj y , (15)
1 1

where functions Cj (k)(j = 1, . . . , 4), are as yet unknown, mj (k)(j = 1, . . . , 4), are the roots
of
(m2 + γ m − κ0 k 2 )2 + k 2 (νγ 2 + (1 − κ02 )k 2 ) = 0, (16)
and are given by
p
m1 = −(γ /2) + (γ /2)2 + κ0 k 2 + i|k|λ = m3 ,
p
m2 = −(γ /2) − (γ /2)2 + κ0 k 2 + i|k|λ = m4 ,
q
λ= νγ 2 + (1 − κ02 )k 2 . (17)
The coefficients bj (k)(j = 1, . . . , 4), are obtained from (14) and (10) as follows
((ν + κ0 )2 + κ12 )mj + 2ν(ν + κ0 )γ
bj (k) = −ik , (j = 1, 2),
((ν + κ0 )2 − κ12 )k 2 + i2(ν + κ0 )|k|λ
q
bj +2 (k) = −b̄j , (j = 1, 2), κ1 = 1 − κ02 (18)
In (17) observing that Rm1 > 0, Rm3 > 0 and Rm2 < 0, Rm4 < 0, the solution satisfying
the regularity conditions at y = ±∞ and the continuity conditions (11) at y = 0 may now be
written as
(
C2 em2 y + C4 em4 y , y > 0,
F (y, k) =
(ē2 C2 + ē1 C4 )em1 y + (e1 C2 + e2 C4 )em3 y , y < 0,
248 Murat Ozturk and Fazil Erdogan
(
b2 C2 em2 y + b4 C4 em4 y , y > 0,
G(y, k) = (19)
b1 (ē2 C2 + ē1 C4 )em1 y + b3 (e1 C2 + e2 C4 )em3 y , y < 0,

where e1 (k) and e2 (k) are known functions given in the Appendix. The two remaining un-
known functions C2 and C4 are determined from the mixed boundary conditions (12) and
(13).

3. Integral equations and the solution

The mixed boundary conditions (12) and (13) which constitute a system of dual integral equa-
tions in C2 and C4 may be reduced to a system of singular integral equations by introducing
1 ∂
ϕ1 (x1 ) = φ1 (x) = [u1 (x1 , +0) − u1 (x1 , −0)]
δ ∂x1
1 ∂
= [u(x, +0) − u(x, −0)],
δ ∂x

∂
ϕ2 (x1 ) = φ2 (x) = [u2 (x1 , +0) − u2 (x1 , −0)]
∂x1
∂
=
[v(x, +0) − v(x, −0)], −∞ < x1 < ∞. (20)
∂x
It is seen that (13) would be satisfied by letting

ϕ1 (x1 ) = 0, ϕ2 (x1 ) = 0, a < |x1 | < ∞, (21)

Z a Z a
ϕ1 (x1 ) dx1 = 0, ϕ2 (x1 ) dx1 = 0. (22)
−a −a

From (14), (19) and (20) the unknowns C2 and C4 may now be expressed as
1
C2 (k) = {−i ḡ2 (k)ψ1 (k) + ḡ1 (k)ψ2 (k)},
k11 (k)

1
C4 (k) = {ig2 (k)ψ1 (k) − g1 (k)ψ2 (k)}, (23)
k11 (k)
where
Z a0 √
ψj (k) = φj (s) e−iks ds, (j = 1, 2), a 0 = a/ δ, (24)
−a 0

and the functions g1 (k), g2 (k) and 11 (k) are given in the Appendix. By substituting from (4),
(14), (19) and (23) into (12) we obtain the following system of integral equations to determine
φ1 and φ2
Z a0 X
2
σxy (x, y) 1
lim = lim K1j (x, y, s)φj (s) ds,
y→+0 E ∗ (y) y→+0 2π −a 0 j =1
 The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium 249
Z a0 X
2
√
σyy (x, y) 1
lim = lim K2j (x, y, s)φj (s) ds, a 0 = a/ δ, (25)
y→+0 E ∗ (y) y→+0 2π −a 0 j =1

Z ∞
Kij (x, y, s) = hij (y, k) e−ik(s−x) dk, (i, j = 1, 2), (26)
−∞

i
h11 (y, k) = {g2 (k)B 2 (k)em4 y − ḡ2 (k)B2 (k)em2 y },
k11 (k)
1
h12 (y, k) = {ḡ1 (k)B2 (k)em2 y − g1 (k)B 2 (k)em2 y },
k11 (k)
1
h21 (y, k) = {g2 (k)A2 (k)em4 y − ḡ2 (k)A2 (k)em2 y },
11 (k)
i
h22 (y, k) = {g1 (k)A2 (k)em4 y − ḡ1 (k)A2 (k)em2 y }, (27)
11 (k)
where the functions A2 and B2 as well as 11 and gj (j = 1, 2), are given in the Appendix.
The singular parts of Kij may be evaluated by separating the leading terms in the asymptotic
analysis of hij (y, k) for |k| → ∞. Thus, after performing the appropriate asymptotic analysis
by using a symbolic manipulator and separating the singular parts of the kernels we obtain1
Z  
1 a ϕ1 (s1 ) τ0 (x1 )
+ N11 ϕ1 (s1 ) + N12 ϕ2 (s1 ) ds1 = ,
π −a s1 − x1 E0 c0 δ
Z  
1 a ϕ2 (s1 ) δσ0 (x1 )
+ N21 ϕ1 (s1 ) + N22 ϕ2 (s1 ) ds1 = , −a < x1 < a, (28)
π −a s1 − x1 E0 c0
1 1
N11 (x1 , s1 ) = √ M11 (x, s), N12 (x1 , s1 ) = M12 (x, s),
2c0 δ 2c0 δ 3/2
√
δ 1
N21 (x1 , s1 ) = M21 (x, s), N22 (x1 , s1 ) = √ M22 (x, s),
2c0 2c0 δ
x1 s1
x=√ , s=√ , (29)
δ δ
p q
1
c0 = , r1 = κ0 + iκ1 , κ1 = 1 − κ02 , (30)
2(r1 + r̄)
Z ∞ 
|k|
M11 (x, s) = h11 (0, k) − ic0 e−ik(s−x) dk,
−∞ k
R
1 The leading terms of the kernels K contain integrals of the form ∞ (|k|/k) exp(−|k|r y − ik(s − x)) dk,
q ij −∞ 1
where r1 = (κ0 + i 1 − κ0 ) . It may be seen that for κ0 6 −1, r1 is pure imaginary and the integrals do not
2 1/2

exist. Hence, for κ0 6 −1 the problem does not have a physically meaningful solution. Indeed in homogeneous
orthotropic solids it is known that for κ0 6 −1 the elasticity matrix is not positive definite (Chou, 1962). Therefore,
for real materials, homogeneous or inhomogeneous, the range of the shear parameter is −1 < κ0 < ∞.
250 Murat Ozturk and Fazil Erdogan
Z ∞
M12 (x, s) = h12(0, k) e−ik(s−x) dk,
−∞
Z ∞
M21 (x, s) = h21(0, k) e−ik(s−x) dk,
−∞

Z ∞ 
|k|
M22 (x, s) = h22 (0, k) − ic0 e−ik(s−x) dk. (31)
−∞ k
The integral equations (30) may be solved by defining the following normalized quantities
t = s1 /a, r = x1 /a, fj (t) = ϕj (s1 ),
kij (r, t) = aNij (x1 , s1 ), (i, j = 1, 2),
q2 (r) = σ0 (x1 ), q1 (r) = τ0 (x1 ),
(32)
E1 = E0 c0 δ, E2 = E0 c0 /δ, −1 < (t, r) < 1.
From (28) and (32) it follows that
Z 2  
1 1 X δij qi (r)
+ kij (r, t) fj (t) dt = , (i = 1, 2), −1 < r < 1. (33)
π −1 1 t − r Ei

Expressing now the solution of (33) in the form1 (Muskhelishvili, 1953)

X∞
1
Ei fi (t) = √ Ain Tn (t), (i = 1, 2), −1 < t < 1, (34)
1 − t2 0
using the following orthogonality condition of the Chebyshev polynomials (Szegö, 1939)

Z 
 1, m = n = 0,
1 1 Tn (t)Tm (t) 
√ dt = 12 , m = n > 1, (35)
π −1 1 − t2 

 0, m 6 = n,
and observing that T0 (t) = 1, from the single-valuedness conditions (22) it may be seen that
A10 = A20 = 0. The singular integral equations (33) are regularized by using the properties
(Szegö, 1939)
Z
1 1 Tn (t)
√ dt
π −1 (t − r) 1 − t 2


 0, n = 0, |r| < 1,

 (36)
 U (r), n > 1, |r| < 1,
n−1
= √

 |r| (r − (|r|/r) r 2 − 1)n


− √ , n = 0, 1, . . . , |r| > 1,
r r2 − 1
1 The square-root singularity implied by (34) follows from the dominant part of the kernels in (33) which is
identical to that of homogeneous isotropic media. Material inhomogeneity and orthotropy are embedded in the
Fredholm kernels kij which may have a significant influence on the stress intensity factors without altering the
singular behavior of the solution.
 The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium 251

where Tn and Un are the Chebyshev polynomials of first and second kind, respectively. From
(33), (34) and (36) we then obtain
∞
X
{[Un−1 (r) + L11n(r)]A1n + L12n(r)A2n } = q1 (r),
1

∞
X
{[L21n(r)A1n + [Un−1 (r) + L22n(r)]A2n } = q2 (r), (37)
1
Z 1
1 Ei kij (r, t)Tn (t)
Lij n (r) = √ dt, (i, j = 1, 2). (38)
π Ej −1 1 − t2
The functional equations (37) may be reduced to a system of algebraic equations by using a
weighted residual method which may then be solved by the method of reduction (Kantorovich
and Krylov, 1958). The advantage of representing the solution in terms of the series of ortho-
gonal polynomials as given by (34) over various direct Gaussian integration methods is that
once the coefficients Ain (i = 1, 2, n = 0, 1, 2, . . .) are determined we have essentially a
closed form solution to the problem (see, for example, (40) and (43)). Furthermore, this is
accomplished without any increase in the computational effort to obtain the same level of
accuracy as one would obtain by using Gaussian integration.
From the derivation of (28) it is clear that in (28) the functions σ0 (x1 ) and τ0 (x1 ) represent
the stress components σ22 (x1 , +0) and σ12 (x1 , +0) for |x1 | > a as well as a < |x1 |. Thus, the
stress intensity factors defined by
p
k1 (a) = lim 2(x1 − a)σ22(x1 , +0),
x1 →a+0
p
k1 (−a) = lim 2(−x1 − a)σ22(x1 , +0),
x1 →−a−0
p
k2 (a) = lim 2(x1 − a)σ12(x1 , +0),
x1 →a+0
p
k2 (−a) = lim 2(−x1 − a)σ12(x1 , +0), (39)
x1 →−a−0

may be obtained by using the property (36c) as follows

∞ ∞
√ X √ X
k1 (a) = − a A2n , k1 (−a) = a (−1)n A2n ,
1 1

∞ ∞
√ X √ X
k2 (a) = − a A1n , k2 (−a) = a (−1)n A1n . (40)
1 1

By examining the asymptotic behavior of the solution of (28) it can be shown that the stress
intensity factors defined by (39) can also be obtained directly in terms of ϕ1 and ϕ2 as follows
E0 c0 p
k1 (a) = − lim 2(a − x1 )ϕ2 (x1 ),
x1 →a−0 δ
252 Murat Ozturk and Fazil Erdogan

Figure 2. Variation of the normalized strain energy release rate with the inhomogeneity parameter αa and the
shear parameter κ0 in a graded orthotropic medium under uniform tension σ22 (x1 , ±∞) = p0 , δ 4 = 10.0, ν =
0.3, G0 = πp02 a/E0 .

p
k2 (a) = − lim E0 c0 δ 2(a − x1 )ϕ1 (x1 ), (41)
x1 →a−0

with similar expressions for k1 (−a) and k2 (−a). Equations (32), (34) and (41) would then
give (40). Similarly, by observing that
Z r
Tn (t) 1p
√ dt = − 1 − r 2 Un−1 (r), −1 < r < 1, (42)
−1 1 − t2 n

from (20), (32) and (34) the crack opening displacements may be evaluated as
q ∞
X
1 1
u1 (x1 , +0) − u1 (x1 , −0) = − a − x1
2 2
A1n Un−1 (x1 /a),
E1 1
n

q ∞
X
1 1
u2 (x1 , +0) − u2 (x1 , −0) = − a − x1
2 2
A2n Un−1 (x1 /a). (43)
E2 1
n

Also, by expressing the asymptotic values of the stresses and the crack opening displace-
ments in terms of the stress intensity factors and by using the conventional crack closure
energy concept, the strain energy release rate may be evaluated at, for example, the crack tip
x1 = a as (Cinar and Erdogan, 1983)
 
π 1 2
G= δk1 (a) + k2 (a) .
2
(44)
4E0 c0 δ

In the corresponding isotropic material δ = 1, κ = 1, c0 = 14 , and G becomes

π 2
G= (k (a) + k22 (a)), (45)
E0 1
 The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium 253

Figure 3. Variation of the normalized strain energy release rate with the inhomogeneity parameter αa and the
stiffness parameter δ in a graded orthotropic medium under uniform tension σ22 (x1 , ±∞) = p0 , κ0 = 1, ν =
0.3, G0 = πp02 a/E0 .

Figure 4. Variation of the normalized strain energy release rate with the stiffness parameter δ and the inhomogen-
eity parameter αa in a graded orthotropic medium under uniform tension σ22 (x1 , ±∞) = p0 , κ0 = 1, ν = 0.3,
G0 = πp02 a/E0 .

where E0 = E(0) for plane stress and E0 = E(0)/(1 − ν 2 ) for plane strain, E(x2 ) and ν being
the elastic parameters of the inhomogeneous medium.

4. Results and discussion

Referring to Figure 1, since the material properties vary in x2 direction only and x1 and x2 are
the principal axes of orthotropy, x1 = 0 is a plane of symmetry with regard to the geometry of
the medium and material properties. Therefore, by decomposing the external loads σ0 (x1 )
and τ0 (x1 ) in (12) into even and odd components, it may be shown that the stresses and
254 Murat Ozturk and Fazil Erdogan

Figure 5. Variation of the normalized strain energy release rate with the shear parameter κ0 and the inhomogeneity
parameter αa in a graded orthotropic medium under uniform tension σ22 (x1 , ±∞) = p0 , δ = 1, ν = 0.3, G0 =
πp02 a/E0 .

Figure 6. Variations of the normalized stress intensity factor with the inhomogeneity parameter α and the shear
parameter κ0 in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium containing a crack under uniform pressure loading
σ0 (x1 ) = −p0 , τ0 (x1 ) = 0, δ 4 = 0.25, ν = 0.3.

displacements are either even or odd functions in x1 . Consequently, it is sufficient to evaluate

the stress intensity factors at one crack tip only (x1 = a). Thus, it may easily be seen that if
σ0 (x1 ) = σ0 (−x1 ), τ0 (x1 ) = −τ0 (−x1 ), (46)
then
k1 (−a) = k1 (a), k2 (−a) = −k2 (a), (47)
and if
σ0 (x1 ) = −σ0 (−x1 ), τ0 (x1 ) = τ0 (−x1 ), (48)
 The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium 255

Figure 7. Variations of the normalized stress intensity factor with the inhomogeneity parameter α and the stiff-
ness parameter δ in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium containing a crack under uniform pressure loading
σ0 (x1 ) = −p0 , τ0 (x1 ) = 0, κ0 = −0.5, ν = 0.3.

Figure 8. Variations of the normalized stress intensity factor with the inhomogeneity parameter α and the shear
parameter κ0 in an infinite inhomogeneous orthotropic medium containing a crack under uniform shear loading
σ0 (x1 ) = 0, τ0 (x1 ) = −q0 , δ 4 = 0.25, ν = 0.3.

then

k1 (−a) = −k1 (a), k2 (−a) = k2 (a). (49)

In the examples given it will be assumed that the crack surface tractions are described by
x   x 2 x   x 2
1 1 1 1
σ0 (x1 ) = −p0 − p1 − p2 , τ0 (x1 ) = −q0 − q1 − q2 . (50)
a a a a
In (9) α has a dimension of 1/length. Thus expressing the exponent by αx2 = (αa)(x2 /a), it
is seen that the inhomogeneity parameter α enters the analysis only through the dimensionless
constant αa.
256 Murat Ozturk and Fazil Erdogan

Figure 9. Variations of the normalized stress intensity factor with the inhomogeneity parameter α and the stiffness
parameter δ in an infinite inhomogeneous orthotropic medium containing a crack under uniform shear loading
σ0 (x1 ) = 0, τ0 (x1 ) = −q0 , κ0 = −0.5, ν = 0.3.

Figure 10. The influence of the inhomogeneity parameter αa on the crack opening displacement
for an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium under uniform pressure loading, σ0 (x1 ) = −p0 , τ0 (x1 ) = 0,
V0 = (u2 (x1 , +0) − u2 (x1 , −0))/v0 , v0 = ap0 /E2 , δ 4 = 10.0, ν = 0.3, κ0 = 0.5.

Some sample results for the strain energy release rate calculated from (44) in an or-
thotropic inhomogeneous medium under uniform tension σ22(x1 , ∓∞) = p0 or σ0 (x1 ) =
−p0 , τ0 (x1 ) = 0 are given in Figures 2–5. The normalizing strain energy release rate G0 =
πp02 a/E0 corresponds to a homogeneous isotropic medium. Figure 2 gives the result for a
fixed stiffness ratio δ 4 = 10 and varying αa and κ0 , whereas in Figure 3 κ0 = 1 is constant.
Note that in an isotropic homogeneous medium αa = 0, κ0 = 1, δ = 1 giving G/G0 = 1
(Figure 3). These results show that generally G is a monotonously increasing function of κ0
and αa. Also the figures show that quantitatively G/G0 may deviate from unity quite con-
siderably, meaning that the influence of κ0 , αa and δ on G can be very significant. Figure 4
 The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium 257

Figure 11. The influence of the inhomogeneity parameter α on the crack opening displacement
U0 for an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium under uniform pressure loading σ0 (x1 ) = −p0 , τ0 (x1 ) = 0,
U0 = (u1 (x1 , +0) − u1 (x1 , −0))/u0 , u0 = ap0 /E1 , δ 4 = 10.0, ν = 0.3, κ0 = 0.5.

Figure 12. The influence of the inhomogeneity parameter αa on the crack opening displacement
V0 for an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium under uniform pressure loading σ0 (x1 ) = −p0 , τ0 (x1 ) = 0,
V0 = (u2 (x1 , +0) − u2 (x1 , −0))/v0 , v0 = ap0 /E2 , δ 4 = 0.25, ν = 0.3, κ0 = −0.5.

shows the variation of G with αa and δ. In the homogeneous case αa = 0 and observing that
E0 = E11 /δ 2 from (44) it may be seen that G → 0 as δ → 0 (Figure 4). Similarly, for a fixed
δ, as κ0 → −1c0 becomes unbounded (see (30)) and (44) indicates that G would tend to zero
(Figure 5). Figures 3–5 show that in all cases G becomes G0 for δ = 1, κ0 = 1 and αa = 0.
Some calculated results for the stress intensity factors are shown in Figures 6–9. The
external loads in these results are the uniform tractions p0 and q0 defined by (50). Gener-
ally, k1 (a) and k2 (a) increase with increasing κ0 and αa and decrease with increasing δ, the
exception being the variation of k2 due to uniform shear q0 for which k2 (a) seems to decrease
with increasing κ0 (Figure 8). These figures show that, regardless of the values of orthotropy
258 Murat Ozturk and Fazil Erdogan
Table 1. The effect of loading conditions and the inhomogeneity parameter αa on the stress
intensity factors.

ν = 0.3, δ 4 = 0.25, κ0 = 0.5

x   x 2
σ0 = −p0 , τ0 = 0 σ0 = −p1 1 , τ0 = 0 σ0 = −p2 1 , τ0 = 0
a a
k1 (a) k2 (a) k1 (a) k2 (a) k1 (a) k2 (a)
αa √ √ √ √ √ √
p0 a p0 a p1 a p1 a p2 a p2 a
0.0 1.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.0
0.10 1.0115 0.0250 0.5009 0.00008 0.5029 0.0063
0.25 1.0489 0.0627 0.5052 0.00078 0.5122 0.0157
0.50 1.1351 0.1263 0.5187 0.0038 0.5338 0.0315
1.0 1.3494 0.2587 0.5618 0.0161 0.5871 0.0640
2.0 1.8580 0.5529 0.6802 0.0569 0.7122 0.1339
x   x 2
1 1
σ0 = 0, τ0 = −q0 σ0 = 0, τ0 = −q1 σ0 = 0, τ0 = −q1
a a
k1 (a) k2 (a) k1 (a) k2 (a) k1 (a) k2 (a)
αa √ √ √ √ √ √
q0 a q0 a q1 a q1 a q2 a q2 a
0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.5
0.10 −0.0494 0.9989 0.0000 0.5002 −0.0124 0.4997
0.25 −0.1191 0.9968 0.0000 0.5013 −0.0298 0.4992
0.50 −0.2217 0.9965 0.0000 0.5050 −0.0552 0.4992
1.0 −0.3862 1.0071 0.0000 0.5174 −0.0955 0.5024
2.0 −0.5725 1.0499 0.0000 0.5529 −0.1513 0.5162

constants κ0 , δ (and ν), as αa tends to zero the stress intensity

√ factors√approach their respective
values for the corresponding isotropic medium, that is, p0 a and q0 a. This, of course, is the
well-known result (Krenk, 1975; Delale and Erdogan, 1977). The figures also show that the
effect of the material inhomogeneity parameter on the mode I stress intensity factor is more
pronounced than on the mode II stress intensity factor.
Typical results showing the crack opening displacements obtained from (43) for ν =
0.3, κ0 = 0.5 and δ 4 = 10 are given in Figures 10 and 11. It may again be seen that the
results are highly dependent on the inhomogeneity parameter αa. Figure 12 shows the normal
crack opening 1u2 = u+ −
2 − u2 for ν = 0.3, κ0 = −0.5 and δ = 0.25. The influence of κ0
4

and δ on 1u2 may be seen from the comparison of Figures 10 and 12.
Table 1 gives some idea about the effect of various loading conditions defined by (50) on
the stress intensity factors. Some sample results showing the effect of Poisson’s ratio ν on the
stress intensity factors for uniform crack surface tractions are given in Table 2. Aside from
√
proportionality in the variation of E11 , E22 and G12 , ν = ν12 ν21 = constant is the only other
assumption made in this study. Table 2 shows that within the range 0.15 6 ν 6 0.45 used
in computations, the effect of ν on the stress intensity factors is rather insignificant. More
detailed results for stress intensity factors covering broad range of parameters αa, κ0 , δ and ν
may be found in the report by Ozturk and Erdogan (1996b). From Tables 1 and 2 it may be
 The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium 259
Table 2. The effect of the Poisson’s ratio ν on the stress intensity factors in an inhomogeneous
orthotropic medium.

σ0 (x1 ) = −p0 , τ0 (x1 ) = 0

κ0 = 5.0 δ4 0.25 10.0

ν 0.15 0.30 0.45 0.15 0.30 0.45
√
αa = 0.5 k1 (a)/p0 a 1.2516 1.2596 1.2674 1.0748 1.0776 1.0804
√
k2 (a)/p0 a 0.1259 0.1259 0.1259 0.1252 0.1252 0.1251
√
αa = 1.0 k1 (a)/p0 a 1.5589 1.5739 1.5884 1.1892 1.1955 1.2017
√
k2 (a)/p0 a 0.2555 0.2557 0.2558 0.2511 0.2512 0.2512

σ0 (x1 ) = 0, τ0 (x1 ) = −q0

κ0 = 5.0 δ4 0.25 10.0

ν 0.15 0.30 0.45 0.15 0.30 0.45

√
αa = 0.5 k1 (a)/q0 a −0.1980 −0.1971 −0.1963 −0.0366 −0.0365 −0.0365
√
k2 (a)/q0 a 0.9898 0.9915 0.9931 0.9956 0.9961 0.9965
√
αa = 1.0 k1 (a)/q0 a −0.3203 −0.3186 −0.3169 −0.0660 −0.0657 −0.0654
√
k2 (a)/q0 a 0.9888 0.9921 0.9953 0.9913 0.9925 0.9938

seen that for the external loads σ0 (x1 ) = 0, τ0 (x1 ) = τ0 (−x1 ), because of symmetry at one
of the crack tips the mode I stress intensity factor is negative. This is a crack/contact problem
and can be solved separately. However, the intent of the results given in the Tables is to make
it possible to obtain an approximate solution for given arbitrary loads σ0 (x1 ) and τ0 (x1 ) by
using superposition. It is then understood that unless the resulting k1 is positive at both crack
tips, the solution would not be valid.
Generally, in orthotropic materials the planes of orthotropy are physically ‘weak’ cleavage
planes. Therefore, in graded orthotropic solids the ‘oblique’ cracking in addition to being
analytically very difficult, is physically unrealistic. Also in orthotropic materials, because
of preferred cleavage planes, usually the crack growth is confined to planes of orthotropy.
Consequently, the strain energy release rate calculated from k1 and k2 would be the natural
crack driving force in studying both critical and subcritical crack propagation.

Appendix

Expressions for various functions that appear in the analysis.

11 (k) = g1 (k)ḡ2 (k) − ḡ1 (k)g2 (k), (A1)
g1 (k) = 1 − e1 (k) − ē2 (k), (A2)
g2 (k) = −i(b2 (k) − b1 (k)ē2 (k) + b̄1 (k)e1 (k)), (A3)
1
e1 (k) = [A1 (k)B2 (k) − A2 (k)B1 (k)], (A4)
10 (k)
260 Murat Ozturk and Fazil Erdogan
1
e2 (k) = [A1 (k)B 2 (k) − A2 (k)B1 (k)], (A5)
10 (k)

10 (k) = A1 (k)B 1 − A1 (k)B1 , (A6)

k
Aj (k) = ((ν + κ0 )k 2 − γ mj (k) + iλ(k)|k|), j = 1, 2 (A7)
P (k)
1
Bj (k) = [((ν + κ0 )mj (k) + νγ )k 2 + imj (k)λ(k)|k|), j = 1, 2 (A8)
P (k)

P (k) = (ν 2 + 2κ0 ν + 2κ02 − 1)k 2 + i2(ν + κ0 )λ(k)|k|, (A9)

p
m1 = −(γ /2) + (γ /2)2 + κ0 k 2 + i|k|λ = m3 , (A10)
p
m2 = −(γ /2) − (γ /2)2 + κ0 k 2 + i|k|λ = m4 , (A11)
q
λ(k) = νγ 2 + (1 − κ02 )k 2 . (A12)

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by ARO under the Grant DAAH04-95-1-0232 and by AFOSR under
the Grant F49620-93-1-0252.

References

Chen, Y.F. and Erdogan, F. (1996). The interface crack problem for a nonhomogeneous coating bonded to a
homogeneous substrate. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 44, 771–787.
Choi, H.J. (1996). Bonded dissimilar strips with a crack perpendicular to the functionally graded interface.
International Journal of Solids and Structures 33, 4101–4117.
Chou, Y.T. (1962). Interaction of parallel dislocations in a hexagonal crystal. Journal of Applied Physics 33,
2747–2751.
Choules, B.D. and Kokini, K. (1993). Multilayer ceramic coating architecture against surface thermal fracture.
Ceramic Coatings (Edited by K. Kokini), ASME MD-Vol 44, 73–86.
Cinar, A. and Erdogan, F. (1983). The crack and wedging problem for an orthotropic strip. International Journal
of Fracture 19, 83–102.
Delale, F. and Erdogan, F. (1977). The problem of internal and edge cracks in an orthotropic strip. ASME Journal
of Applied Mechanics 44, 237–242.
Delale, F. and Erdogan, F. (1983). The crack problem for a nonhomogeneous plane. ASME Journal of Applied
Mechanics 50, 609–614.
Erdogan, F. (1995). Fracture mechanics of functionally graded materials. Composites Engineering 5, 753–770.
Erdogan, F. and Wu, B.H. (1996). Crack problems in FGM layers under thermal stresses. Journal of Thermal
Stresses 19, 237–265.
Gao, H. (1991). Fracture analysis of nonhomogeneous materials via a moduli-perturbation approach. International
Journal of Solids and Structures 27, 1663–1682.
Holt, J.B., Koizumi, M., Hirai, T. and Munir, Z.A. (eds.) (1993). Proceedings of the Second International Sym-
posium on Functionally Graded Materials, Ceramic Transactions 34, American Ceramic Society, Westerville,
Ohio.
Ilschner, B. and Cherradi, N. (eds.) (1995). Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Structural and
Functional Gradient Materials. Presses Polytechniques et Universitaires Romands, Lausanne, Switzerland.
 The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium 261

Jin, Z.-H. and Noda, N. (1994). Transient thermal stress intensity factors for a crack in a semi-infinite plate of a
functionally gradient material. International Journal of Solids and Structures 31, 203–218.
Kantorovich, L.V. and Krylov, V.I. (1958). Approximate Methods of Higher Analysis. Interscience, New York.
Kasmalkar, M. (1996). Surface and internal crack problems in a homogeneous substrate coated by a graded layer.
Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Mechanical Engineering and Mechanics, Lehigh University, Bethlehem,
PA, U.S.A.
Kaysser, W.A. and Ilschner, B. (1995). FGM research activities in Europe. M.R.S. Bulletin 20(1), 22–26.
Konda, N. and Erdogan, F. (1994). The mixed mode crack problem in a nonhomogeneous elastic plane.
Engineering Fracture Mechanics 47, 533–545.
Krenk, S. (1975). Stress distribution in an infinite anisotropic plate with collinear cracks. International Journal of
Solids and Structures 11, 449–460.
Krenk, S. (1979). On the elastic constants of plane orthotropic elasticity. Journal of Composite Materials 13,
108–116.
Kurihara, K., Sasaki, K. and Kawarada, M. (1990). Adhesion Improvement of Diamond Films. FGM-90. Pro-
ceedings of the First International Symposium on Functionally Graded Materials, FGM Forum (Edited by
Yamanouchi et al.), Tokyo, Japan, 65–69.
Lee, Y.-D. and Erdogan, F. (1995). Residual/thermal stresses in FGM and laminated thermal barrier coatings.
International Journal of Fracture 69, 145–165.
Muskhelishvili, N.I. (1953). Singular Integral Equations, P. Noordhoff N.V., Groningen-Holland.
Noda, N. and Jin, Z.-H. (1993). Thermal stress intensity factors for a crack in a strip of a functionally gradient
material. International Journal of Solids and Structures 30, 1039–1056.
Ozturk, M. and Erdogan, F. (1996a). Axisymmetric crack problem in bonded materials with a graded interfacial
region. International Journal of Solids and Structures 33, 193–212.
Ozturk, M. and Erdogan, F. (1996b). The mixed mode crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium.
Project Report, Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Grant F49620-93-1-0252.
Ozturk, M. and Erdogan, F. (1997). Mode I crack problem in an inhomogeneous orthotropic medium. International
Journal of Engineering Science 35, 869–883.
Sampath, S., Herman, H., Shimoda, N. and Saito, T. (1995). Thermal spray processing of FGMs. M.R.S. Bulletin
20(1), 27–31.
Szegö, G. (1939). Orthogonal Polynomials. Colloqium Publications, 23 American Mathematical Society.
Yamanouchi, M., Koizumi, M., Hirai, T. and Shiota, I. (ed.) (1990). FGM-90. Proceedings of the First
International Symposium on Functionally Graded Materials, FGM Forum, Tokyo, Japan.