See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/356389508

Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Simulation by the Finite Element Method

Chapter · January 2022

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-86009-7_14

CITATIONS READS

0 307

5 authors, including:

A. Sedmak Srdjan Tadic

University of Belgrade 19 PUBLICATIONS   251 CITATIONS   
402 PUBLICATIONS   2,435 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Snezana Kirin Milos Djukic

University of Belgrade University of Belgrade
81 PUBLICATIONS   270 CITATIONS    104 PUBLICATIONS   819 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

European Enterprise Network View project

Hydrogen Embrittlement - Understanding and research framework View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Milos Djukic on 03 January 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Stress Corrosion Crack Growth
Simulation by the Finite Element Method

Aleksandar Sedmak , Srdjan Tadic, Snezana Kirin, Milos Djukic,

and Mohamed Al Kateb

Abstract Stress corrosion crack growth in mild steel was investigated by using the
finite element simulation method. A model simulating crack growth considered an
edge crack located on the metal surface, under tensile remote stress acting on a
sample. Numerical analysis was performed using the Code _Aster software to simu-
late crack growth. Three related variables were evaluated. K, dK/da and maximum
stress. Values of these variables were recorded every 2 mm of the crack growth.
Results showed an increase in the values of K and maximum stress, while there was
a decrease in the values of dK/da, as the crack length increased. There was a good
agreement between the results obtained analytically in the literature and numerically
obtained here by using finite elements. The results obtained here are consistent with
what has been obtained in most of the studies that have been conducted in this regard.

Keywords Stress corrosion crack rate · Extended finite element method · Stress
intensity factor

1 Introduction

Stress corrosion cracking is an environmentally assisted failure of engineering mate-

rials, characterized by gradual crack growth, and eventual final failure, as a result
of simultaneous action of chemical reactions and mechanical forces at the crack tip
[1]. Stress corrosion cracking is caused by three main interacting factors, as shown
in Fig. 1:
(1) material susceptibility to cracking,
(2) environmental corrosive conditions,

A. Sedmak (B) · M. Djukic · M. Al Kateb

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Belgrade, Kraljice Marije 16, 11000 Belgrade,
Serbia
e-mail: asedmak@mas.bg.ac.rs
S. Tadic · S. Kirin
Innovation Center, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Kraljice Marije 16, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 257
N. Mitrovic et al. (eds.), Current Problems in Experimental and Computational Engineering,
Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems 323,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86009-7_14
258 A. Sedmak et al.

Fig. 1. Relationship
between SCC factors

(3) tensile stress, applied or residual.

Also, depending on the rate of chemical reactions at the crack tip, ’hydrogen
induced cracking’ (HIC) is considered as a specific mechanism of stress corrosion
cracking, [2–5].
During the tress corrosion crack growth, three regions are typically observed
above threshold stress-intensity factor level (KIscc ):
(1) low stress intensity factor K values: crack growth rate increases fast,
(2) intermediate stress intensity factor K values: crack growth rate is practically
constant,
(3) stress intensity factor K values approaches its critical value, KIc : rapid crack
growth appears, as well as eventual final failure [5].
There are many papers explaining chemical, electrochemical and mechanical
aspects of stress corrosion crack growth, [6–10], mostly focused on actions at the
crack tip. Their goal is to simulate mechanisms and modeling of stress corrosion
cracking (SCC), including the finite elements analysis [8, 9].
In this paper, attention was focused on numerical simulation of stress corrosion
crack growth behavior in mild steel, by using the finite element simulation method,
[11, 12]. A model simulating crack growth was applied to metal surface under tensile
stress to the sample. Finite element analysis of tensile stress was performed using
the Code-Aster software to verify the effect of crack growth.

2 Extended Finite Element Method

Finite Element Method (FEM) has extremely important role in engineering practice,
since it can deal efficiently with challenging geometric forms, different material
Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Simulation by the Finite 259

Fig. 2. Nodes NT and H(x)

improved function

behavior and complex problems. It is one of very a few methods to tackle non-
smooth fracture crack tip stress and strain fields, using different techniques of fracture
mechanics singularity simulations, [13].
Nevertheless, if applied to the problem of crack growth, standard FEM proce-
dure would include re-meshing at each step of crack growth. To do so, numerous
techniques have been suggested, but without real success, before the extended finite
element method (XFEM) has been developed, using completely different approach,
[14, 15], based on additional, so-called enhancement functions (Heaviside’s func-
tion – H, Near Tip functions – NT), in the nodes of elements crack cuts through,
Fig. 2. The essential feature and main advantage of XFEM is the fact that mesh is
independent of crack growth, so there is no need for re-meshing.
Application of XFEM to solve different engineering problems, e.g. fatigue crack
growth in welded joints, has been presented in number of papers [16–20]. Here,
XFEM is applied to stress corrosion crack (SCC) growth problem, by using Code-
Aster FE open source software, as explained in more details in [12].

2.1 XFEM Analysis of SCC Growth in a Tensile Specimen

Results of testing the SCC growth rate in tensile specimen made of mild steel (YS
= 450 MPa), as presented in [21], are shown here in Fig. 3, together with theoretical
260 A. Sedmak et al.

Fig. 3. SCC growth rate theoretical prediction (full line) and experimental data (black points), mild
steels [21]

predictions, and used to verify results of numerical analysis, as performed by using

XFEM in this research. Finite element mesh is shown in Fig. 4, representing one
half of a tensile specimen, with the fine mesh in the mid-section. The crack itself
was not drawn, but it was defined as a simple function in Code-Aster. Calculations
were performed with crack represented as a lateral notch, a = 2 ÷ 20 mm. Applied
remote stress was σ = 150 MPa. External Python procedure was written to enhance
some automation in this procedure.
Results of XFEM calculation are shown in Figs. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and
14 for stress distribution, in Fig. 15 for stress intensity factor K vs. crack length a,
in Fig. 16 for stress intensity factor rate dK/da versus crack length a, and in Table 1
for both K and dK/da versus a. One can see smooth increase of K and decrease of
dK/da with growing a, as predicted by theoretical analysis, [2, 3]. Therefore, one can
consider XFEM, as applied here, being verified by the experimental and theoretical
results.

3 Conclusions

Based on the presented results, one can conclude that the stress intensity factor K
increases with crack length increase, stress intensity crack rate dK/da decreases and
maximum stress increases. This means that as crack grows, although K and maximum
stress increase, the rate of K decreases, so the process decelerate, at least from that
point of view, leading to the conclusion that stress corrosion cracking is a slow and
stable process.
Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Simulation by the Finite 261

Fig. 4. Geometry of tensile test specimen. Dimensions are in mm

262 A. Sedmak et al.

Fig. 5. Stress distribution for a = 2 mm: a 2D view, b 3D view

Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Simulation by the Finite 263

Fig. 6. Stress distribution for a = 4 mm: a 2D view, b 3D view

264 A. Sedmak et al.

Fig. 7. Stress distribution for a = 6 mm: a 2D view, b 3D view

Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Simulation by the Finite 265

Fig. 8. Stress distribution for a = 8 mm: a 2D view, b 3D view

266 A. Sedmak et al.

Fig. 9. Stress distribution for a = 10 mm: a 2D view, b 3D view

Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Simulation by the Finite 267

Fig. 10. Stress distribution for a = 12 mm: a 2D view, b 3D view

268 A. Sedmak et al.

Fig. 11. Stress distribution for a = 14 mm: a 2D view, b 3D view

Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Simulation by the Finite 269

Fig. 12. Stress distribution for a = 16 mm: a 2D view, b 3D view

270 A. Sedmak et al.

Fig. 13. Stress distribution for a = 18 mm: a 2D view, b 3D view

Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Simulation by the Finite 271

Fig. 14. Stress distribution for a = 20 mm: a 2D view, b 3D view

272 A. Sedmak et al.

Fig. 15. Stress intensity factor K versus crack length a

Fig. 16. Stress intensity crack rate dK/da versus crack length a
Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Simulation by the Finite 273

Table 1. Data for K, dK/da

a K √ dK/da √
and max stress vs. crack
(mm) (MPa m) (MPa/ m)
length a
2 9.1 2278.3
4 12.9 1611.1
6 15.8 1315.4
8 18.2 1139.0
10 20.4 1018.9
12 22.3 930.1
14 24.1 861.1
16 25.7 805.5
18 27.3 759.4
20 28.8 720.5

References

1. Aly, O.F., Neto, M.M.: Stress Corrosion Cracking. Chapter in a book, INTECH, pp. 65–79
(2014). http://dx.doi.org/0.5772/57349
2. Djukic, M., Bakic, G., Sijacki-Zeravcic, V., Sedmak, A., Rajicic, B.: The synergistic action
and interplay of hydrogen embrittlement mechanisms in steels and iron: localized plasticity
and decohesion. Eng. Fract. Mech. 216, 106528 (2019)
3. Djukic, M.B., Bakic, G.M., Zeravcic, V.S., Sedmak, A., Rajicic, B.: Hydrogen embrittlement of
industrial components: prediction, prevention, and models. Corrosion 72(7), 943–961 (2016)
4. Djukic, M.B., Bakic, G.M., Zeravcic, V.S., Rajicic, B., Sedmak, A., Mitrovic, R., Miskovic,
Z.: Towards a unified and practical industrial model for prediction of hydrogen embrittlement
and damage in steels. Procedia Struct. Integr. 2, 604–611 (2016)
5. Hirose, Y., Mura, T.: Growth mechanism of stress corrosion cracking in high strength steel.
Eng. Fract. Mech. 19, 1057–1067 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(84)90151-6
6. Bland, L.G., Locke, J.S.: Chemical and electrochemical conditions within stress corrosion and
corrosion fatigue cracks. npj Mater. Degrad. 1, 12 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41529-017-
0015-0
7. Turnbull, A., Ferriss, D.: Mathematical modelling of the electrochemistry in corrosion fatigue
cracks in structural steel cathodically protected in sea water. Corros. Sci. 26, 601–628 (1986).
https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-938x(86)90027-2
8. Turnbull, A.: Modelling of crack chemistry in sensitized stainless steel in boiling water reactor
environments. Corros. Sci. 39, 789–805 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-938x(97)893
42-0
9. Turnbull, A.: Modeling of the chemistry and electrochemistry in cracks a review. Corrosion
57, 175–189 (2001). https://doi.org/10.5006/1.3290342
10. Mohanty, S., Majumdar, S., Natesan, K.: A review of stress corrosion cracking/fatigue
modeling, Argonne national laboratory (2012). https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Enviro
nmental_Fatigue.pdf
11. Al Kateb, M.: Experimental and numerical investigation of corrosion crack growth in mild
structural steel, doctoral thesis, University of Belgrade (2021)
12. Alkateb, M., Tadić, S., Sedmak, A., Ivanović, I., Marković, S.: Crack growth rate analysis of
stress corrosion cracking. Tech. Gaz. 28(1), 240–247 (2021)
13. Sedmak, A.: Computational fracture mechanics: an overview from early efforts to recent
achievements. Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 41, 2438–2474 (2018). https://doi.org/10.
1111/ffe.12912
 274 A. Sedmak et al.

14. Belytschko, T., Lu, Y.Y., Gu, L.: Element-free Galerkin methods. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng.
37(2), 229–256 (1994)
15. Jovičić, G., Živković, M., Sedmak, A., Jovičić, N., Milovanović, D.: Improvement of algorithm
for numerical crack modeling. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 10(3), 19–35 (2010)
16. Zaidi, R., Sedmak, A., Kirin, S., Grbovic, A., Li, W., Lazic Vulicevic, L., Sarkocevic, Z.: Risk
assessment of oil drilling rig welded pipe based on structural integrity and life estimation. Eng.
Fail. Anal. 112, 104508 (2020)
17. Milovanović, N., Sedmak, A., Arsic, M., Sedmak, S.A., Božić, Z.: Structural integrity and life
assessment of rotating equipment. Eng. Fail. Anal. 113, 104561 (2020)
18. Kraedegh, A., Li, W., Sedmak, A., Grbovic, A., Trišović, N., Kirin, S.: Simulation of fatigue
crack growth in A2024–T351 “T” welded joint. Struct. Integr. Life 17(1), 3–6 (2017)
19. Sghayer, A., Grbović, A., Sedmak, A., Dinulović, M., Doncheva, E., Petrovski, B.: Fatigue life
analysis of the integral skin-stringer panel using XFEM. Struct. Integr. Life 17(1), 7–10 (2017)
20. Durdevic, A., Zivojinovic, D., Grbovic, A., Sedmak, A., Rakin, M., Dascau, H., Kirin, S.:
Numerical simulation of fatigue crack propagation in friction stir welded joint made of Al
2024–T351 alloy. Eng. Fail. Anal. 58, 477–484 (2015)
21. Parkins, R.N., Greenwell, B.S.: The interface between corrosion fatigue and stress-corrosion
cracking. Metal. Sci. 11, 405–413 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1179/msc.1977.11.8-9.405

View publication stats