J. Phys. Chem. Solidv Vol. 48, No. II, pp. 103~-1074, 1987 OOZZ-3697187 13.00 + 0.

00
Printed in Great Britain. 0 1987 Pergamon Journals Ltd.

DUCTILE FRACTURE
W. M. GARRISON JR
Department of Metallurgical Engineering and Materials Science, Carnegie-Mellon University,
Pittsburgh, PA 15213, U.S.A.

and
N. R. MOODY
Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA 94550, U.S.A.

Abstract-The purpose of this paper is to review ductile fracture of metallic systems. The goal has been
to present both mechanics and microstructural aspects of ductile fracture and to emphasize the interplay
between the approaches. The paper considers first experimental studies and efforts to model the three
stages of ductile fracture: void nucleation, void growth and void coalescence. To make explicit the
necessity of incorporating both mechanics and microstructure in studies of ductile fracture, the fracture
behavior of three different mechanical tests are discussed. These are axisymmetric tensile specimens with
and without notches, plane strain tensile specimens and specimens containing sharp notches used to
measure fracture initiation toughness.
Keywords: Ductile fracture, void nucleation, void growth, void coalescence, tensile ductility, plane strain
tensile, notched tensile, fracture toughness, modeling fracture initiation.

1. INTRODUCTION Puttick found that void initiation occurred by frac-

ture of non-metallic inclusions and by the decohesion
Ductile fracture is a mode of material failure
in which voids, either already existing within the
material or nucleated during deformation, grow until
they link together, or coalesce, to form a continuous
fracture path. Other terms used for this fracture mode
are fibrous fracture, dimpled rupture or microvoid
coalescence, As Fig. 1 shows, the fracture surfaces of
materials failing by ductile fracture are covered by
segments of the voids which coalesced to produce the
fracture path. These void segments were termed
dimples by Plateau et al. [I]. The dimples in Fig. 1
vary widely in size and some have obviously been
nucleated at second-phase particles while the nuclei
for others are not as readily apparent.
The most significant step toward understanding the
microstructural origins of ductile fracture was the
discovery that voids nucleate at inclusions and
second-phase particles. This was not recognized until
more than a century after the early work of Henry,
who in 1855 suggested that ductile metals fracture by
internal necking when stretched [2]. In 1927, Ludwik
sectioned a necked but unbroken tensile specimen of
aluminum and found that fracture had initiated as an
internal crack which had apparently started in the
center of the neck [3]. Tipper suggested in 1948 that
the tensile fracture of ductile metals proceeded by the
growth of voids, initiated by matrix decohesion from
nonmetallic inclusions [4]. Unequivocal supporting
evidence for this hypothesis was presented in 1959 by
Puttick [S] and was later corroborated by the work of
Rogers [6]. On examining sectioned tensile specimens
of copper and iron under the optical microscope
1035
of the inclusion-matrix interface. Crussard ef al.
observed numerous cup-like indentations in electron
micrographs of carbon replicas of fracture surfaces
[A. They speculated that voids had produced the
indentations which were found on the fracture sur-
faces. The connection between second phase par-
ticles, void nucleation and the fracture surface has
been confirmed repeatedly in subsequent experiments
employing optical metallography of sectioned speci-
mens, transmission electron microscopy of thin sec-
tions from the vicinity of fracture surfaces, scanning
fractography and fracture surface replication. An
emphasis on the role of inclusions and particles in
initiating ductile fracture is justified when one consid-
ers the range of deformation states and the variety of
materials in which it has been demonstrated: intemal-
ly oxidized copper alloys [8], various maraging steels
[9, lo], quenched and tempered high-strength steels
[9], low-strength steels [ 1l] and aluminum alloys [ 121.
However, while second-phase particles act as void
nuclei in many systems, there are systems where voids
can be nucleated by other mechanisms. These include
formation of voids at interfaces as in a-b titanium
alloys [13-151, and at slipband intersections [l&20].
In addition, void nucleation by vacancy condensation
has been suggested [21]. While there are other frac-
ture types which have a ductile character such as
rupture [6,22], our interest here is in ductile fracture
arising from the nucleation, growth and coalescence
of voids. Furthermore, the focus will be on metallic
systems deformed at temperatures less than about
one-third their melting temperature; therefore void
1036 W. M. GARRISONJR and N. R. MOODY

l.A . scanning electron micrograph of the fracture surface of a fracture toughness specimen illustra ting
coallescence. The material is a low alloy steel and the inclusions visible on the fracture su are
manganese sulfides.

formation during creep and irradiation will not be
considered.
The locally high levels of plastic deformation asso-
ciated with the voids seen in Fig. 1 suggest that
ductile fracture requires high levels of energy absorp-
tion. However, this is not always the case; various
properties, such as tensile ductility or toughness,
associated with energy absorbed during the fracture
process, can be quite low. For example, even low
strength materials exhibit very low tensile ductilities
if the volume fraction of a void nucleating second
phase is sufficiently high. In addition, the fracture
initiation toughness of higher strength materials con-
taining reasonably low volume fractions of void
nucleating particles can be quite low even though
their tensile ductilities might be reasonably high.
Moreover, materials which exhibit similar tensile
ductilities may have very different fracture initiation
toughnesses. Thus, the energy associated with ductile
fracture can vary enormously depending on the mate-
rial and the nature of the mechanical test.
Over the past 20 yr there has been a large effort to
improve the properties of engineering alloys failing
by ductile fracture and to understand how the three
stages of ductile fracture-void nucleation, growth,
and coalescence-combine to determine these prop-
erties. For ductile fracture, the engineering properties
are determined by the interaction of stress and strain
fields with the microstructure of the material. Because
ductile fracture involves both mechanics and micro-
structure a diversity of approaches have been taken
to its study. One extreme is to use a continuum
mechanics approach to model ductile fracture. The
other is the classic metallurgical approach of varying
microstructural features and correlating the changes
in properties with those changes. However, it is clear
that any solution to the problem of ductile fracture
involves both mechanics and microstructural aspects.
It is hoped that the interplay between the mechanics
and microstructural oriented approaches will be ap-
parent throughout this paper. To reinforce this theme
the fracture behavior associated with three different
types of mechanical tests will be discussed. These will
be axisymmetric tensile specimens of different geom-
etries, plane strain tensile specimens and specimens
containing sharp notches used to measure fracture
initiation toughness.
This review coupled with others will provide the
interested reader with a good overview of our present
understanding of ductile fracture and of current
 Ductile fracture
research interests. Review articles on ductile fracture
include those by Van Stone et al. [23], Rosenfield [24]
and Hahn et al. [25]. A more mechanics oriented
review is presented by Howard and Willoughby [26].
Schwalbe’s article is an excellent source for micro-
structural effects [27].
II. STAGES OF THE FRACTURE PROCESS
For purposes of discussion the process of ductile
fracture can be divided into three stages: (1) void
nucleation, (2) void growth, and (3) void co-
alescence. However, it is difficult to define where one
stage ends and the next begins during fracture of
materials. Even if the material contains only one type
of second-phase particle, void initiation will not
occur simultaneously at all of the particles. Typically
voids nucleate at the larger particles first. As the
fracture process continues, voids nucleated at the
larger particles grow while voids are nucleated at the
smaller particles. The process becomes even more
complicated for materials that contain several types
of second-phase particles. In these materials, voids
will often nucleate first at a particular particle type,
and later in the fracture process at another set of
particles. It is often the case that some of the particles
may never initiate voids at all, but may affect the
fracture process only indirectly by influencing the
flow characteristics of the matrix. An example of such
a complex system is the ultra high strength steel 4340.
This steel contains inclusions, often small undissolved
carbides, and, after tempering at 2OO”C,fine carbides
precipitated on tempering. Voids initiate first at the
inclusions, later in the fracture process at the un-
dissolved carbides and perhaps not at all at the
precipitated carbides. While a sharp division between
initiation, growth and coalescence might be some-
what misleading, the following discussion of the
fracture process will consider the three stages
separately.
1I.A Void initiation
II.A.1 Experimental observations. Void initiation
can occur by decohesion of the particle-matrix
interface and by fracture of the particle. For a given
type of particle, particle fracture is favored as the size
of the particle increases although this is influenced by
the shape of the particle, its orientation (if not
equiaxed), and by the strength of the particle-matrix
bond.
Particle-matrix decohesion does not occur simul-
taneously at all points along the particle-matrix
interface even for spherical particles. In tensile speci-
mens, voids initiate at the particle-matrix interface
along the axis of applied stress at the position of
maximum tensile stress. A number of factors
influence the conditions required for this nucleation
event to occur. These include particle size, stress
state, interfacial cohesion, strength of the matrix
material, and particle volume fraction. In what
1037
follows reference will be made to a nucleation strain.
However, experimental evidence suggests that even
for a fixed matrix material a nucleation strain is
hardly unique and will apparently vary within a
given distribution of particles and with the stress
state.
Most experimental evidence suggests that void
nucleation occurs first at the larger particles within
the particle distribution. This has been observed in
copper alloys containing SiO, [8], for constituent
particles in aluminum alloys [28], for various types
of inclusions in steels [9,29] in T.D. nickel [30] and
for spheroidized carbides in steels [31]. Thus for
given test conditions the larger particles in a given
distribution are expected to nucleate at lower strains.
In addition, replacing one particle distribution
with another characterized by a smaller average
size should increase the strain required for void
nucleation.
The strain at which void nucleation occurs is
apparently very dependent on the stress state. Cox
and Low have investigated the influence of stress
state on void nucleation at MnS particles in 4340
steel using smooth axisymmetric tensile specimens
and notched tensile specimens [9]. Figure 2 shows
the fraction of MnS inclusions with voids as a
function of true plastic strain for the 4340 steel. In
the notched specimens, with a higher triaxial stress,
voids nucleated at lower strains than in the smooth
tensile specimens. Void nucleation in the high purity
steel, with its smaller average inclusion size, occurred
at higher strains than in the commercial purity 4340.
Other evidence for the importance of stress state
on void nucleation come from studies of the effects
of hydrostatic pressure. French and Weinrich [32]
studied void nucleation at cementite particles in a
spheroidized 1050 carbon steel using smooth tensile
specimens uniaxially deformed under superimposed
hydrostatic pressure. They found that increasing the
pressure from 0.1 to 300 MPa significantly retarded
void nucleation, but there was little change in the
F _F
100 -- , I
2 . 0 SMOOTH SPECIMENS
? F A A NOTCHED SPECIMENS
SOLID SYMBOLS REPRESENT_
= 75
VJ
COMMERCIAL PURITY
5 OPEN SYMBOLS REPRESENT
4 HIGH PURITY
g 50
3 F
z
I- 25
5
t?
k! I I I I I
00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 050 060
TRUE STRAIN
Fig. 2. A plot of per cent inclusions with voids as a function
of the true strain for commercial and high purity heats of
4340 steel. The sulfur levels and inclusion volume fractions
associated with the commercial and high purity heats were
0.013 wt % and 0.004 wt % and 0.0014 and 0.0006 [9].
1038 W. M. GARRISONJR and N. R. MCQDY

1 I I I I I I -
IOO- ’ 18 Ni.300 GRADE MARAGING STEEL
YIELD STRENGTH (KS11
0 (I 04). Solution Treat.
lOoF- 50 hrs.
80 I- A (225),800’F- 3 hrs.
0 (2891, 900°F- 3 hrs.
A (2481, lOOO*F-3hrs.
n (3001, 800°F- 100 hrs.

F indicates a fractured specimen

I I I I I I I
0.4 0.8 0.8 I.0 1.2 I.4 1.8
PLASTIC STRAIN

Fig. 3. The per cent of Ti,S inclusions associated with voids as a function of strain for a maraging steel
aged to several different strength levels [29].

strain required for void nucleation as the hydrostatic
pressure was increased from 300 to 600 MPa. This
result suggests that when large stresses are required
for void nucleation, a simple normal stress criterion
may not be adequate to describe the onset of void
nucleation, but rather a criterion based on both
stress and strain may be required [23]. Additional
support for this conclusion comes indirectly from the
work by Coffin and Rogers on the influence of
hydrostatic pressure on strip and wire drawing [33].
On the other hand, Chen has presented evidence
which suggests hydrostatic tension will influence only
void growth, not void formation [34].
Psioda’s work on a 300 grade maraging steel
suggests that matrix strength, or perhaps more
correctly the flow characteristics of the matrix, can
influence void nucleation [29]. By varying the aging
conditions, the yield strength of the steel could be
varied from 104 to 300 ksi. The percent of T&S
inclusions in the steel which were associated with
voids is plotted in Fig. 3 as a function of strain for
the different strength levels. These data suggest that
void nucleation occurs at lower strains in higher
strength materials.
It is also believed that the nucleation strain can be
influenced by altering the strength of the cohesive
bond between the particle and the matrix. The
addition of zinc to copper containing particles of
SiOz was found to reduce the nucleation strain and
this was attributed to a reduction in the strength of
the bond between the copper and the SiO, particles
[35]. There have been only a few attempts to increase
the bond strength between metal matrices and inclu-
sions. Fischmeister et al. [36] examined the effects of
alloying on the bond strength between iron and
Al,09 particles. They employed an expression devel-
oped by Ashby [37] which relates the work of
adhesion (bond strength) and the strain at which
decohesion occurs:
where G is shear modulus, b is Burgers vector, d is
particle diameter, t is critical strain for separation,
and k is mean particle spacing.
Specimens prepared by powder metallurgy tech-
niques were cold rolled to 75% reduction, then held
30min at 1100°C to equilibrate cavities. Contact
angles at voids were measured in a high-voltage
electron microscope. The work of adhesion was
determined from
w,, = yu(l -cos O),
where yu is the surface energy of the matrix (as-
sumed) and 0 is the contact angle between matrix
and inclusion. In this and a subsequent study [38] it
was found that MO or Cr additions to the iron matrix
produced large improvements in ductility. Additions
of Cr to an F&O% Ni base increased W,, to such
an extent that no voids were found at A&O3 particles
after 75% cold work. A similar effect of Cr in
increasing adhesion between ThO, and Ni was noted
by Franklin et al. [39]. Chromium also increases
significantly the cohesion between ferrite and MnS
[40]. In a third investigation Easterling et al. strained
foils in the high-voltage microscope and related flow
stress and ductility to 0 [41]. When 0 was less than
10” the material was brittle; high values of 0
 Ductile fracture
produced ductile fractures, Sundstrom came to the
same conclusion on the basis of calculations per-
formed on a plane strain model of Al,O, inclusions
in y Fe [42]. For a large work of adhesion, 2 J rnm2,
no decohesion occurred. For intermediate values,
decohesion was followed by void growth and for a
very small work of adhesion, 0.02-0.2 Jmm2, brittle
fracture occurred.
There is evidence that segregation of impurity
atoms to the particle-matrix interface can reduce the
strains required for void nucleation. Rellick and
McMahon [43] and Smith and Low [44] have shown
that trace elements such as phosphorous, antimony
and tin segregate to ferrite-carbide interfaces during
temper embrittlement of steels. King and Knott have
shown that temper embrittlement heat-treatment of
a low alloy steel results in a large reduction in
toughness even when failure is by dimpled rupture
[45]. Hippseley and Druce have investigated the
influence of temper embrittlement heat treatments on
the ductile fracture of the low alloy steel 300M
initially tempered at 650°C for 10 hr [46]. They found
that the temper embrittlement treatment significantly
reduced the strain required for initiation of voids at
the carbides. Using Auger techniques they observed
strong segregation of phosphorus to the
ferrite-carbide interface in the temper embrittled
material.
Voids can also be initiated by the fracture of
second-phase particles. Systems in which fracture of
second-phase particles have been observed include
constituent particles in aluminium alloys [47],
cementite in steels [31], as well as sulfides, and
Ti(CN) and other inclusions in steels [9,29,48-501.
Gurland demonstrated that void nucleation occurred
by cracking of spheroidized cementite in a 1.05%
carbon steel under tensile, compressive, and torsional
loading [31]. Cracking occurred perpendicular to the
direction of the maximum principal strain under all
three loading conditions which coincided with the
direction of the highest tensile stress and the largest
particles fractured at the lowest strains. Particle
fractures are often constrained to the second-phase
particles, but in some cases, cracks are observed to
run continuously through the particle some distance
into the matrix. Factors which influence the tendency
for void formation by particle cracking include
particle size [31,47], strength of the matrix [29],
particle shape [51,52], and the strength of the
matrix-particle bond, which can be altered by segre-
gation of impurity elements. Gangulee and Gurland
[47] found for a given particle volume fraction and
level of applied stress that the fraction of particles
which fractured scaled with the square root of the
average particle diameter. In general, they found that
the fraction of particles which fractured scaled with
~~di’~/f’~ where CTis the true applied stress, d is the
average particle diameter andfis the particle volume
fraction (Fig. 4). Restaino and McMahon (531 have
pointed out that segregation of impurities to the
P.C.S.
4*/1
I--F
1039
interface between plate-like carbides and ferrite will
result in decohesion whereas in the absence of such
impurity segregation particle cracking was observed.
Void nucleation sites other than second phase
particles have been observed in many alloy systems.
Thompson and Williams [54] observed that relatively
featureless dimples formed in single-phase a Ti-Al
alloys. There were no void nucleating particles evi-
dent which led to the suggestion that twin bound-
aries, grain boundaries, vacancy clusters or slip band
intersections may have acted as nucleation sites.
Subsequently, Van Stone et al. [55,56] showed that
void nucleation occurred at twin boundaries in a
Ti-5Al-2.5 Sn alloy tested at room temperature and
at intense slip band intersections when tested at
cryogenic temperatures.
In OFHC copper, Nieh and Nix [57] observed that
failure occurred by grain boundary void formation
during high-temperature creep tests. Both the grain
boundary void size and slip band spacing varied
inversely with applied stress. The one-to-one corre-
spondence between grain boundary void size and slip
band spacing suggested that void nucleation resulted
from the intersection of slip bands with the grain
boundaries.
A diversity of void nucleation sites has been ob-
served in a + /I titanium alloys. In aged a + /? alloys,
failure often nucleates at cctitanium particles [13-l 51.
The voids which form at these particles result from
the intersection of planar slip bands in the a particle
with the particle-matrix boundary. These voids sub-
sequently grow along the a boundaries until they
impinge.
The propensity for voids to nucleate at and grow
along grain boundaries permits a wide range of
fracture toughness values to be obtained from ti-
tanium alloys by changing the morphology and dis-
tribution of the void nucleating a phase through
heat-treatment. This is illustrated by the study of
Galda et al. [58], of grain size effects on fracture
toughness of Ti-6A1-4V. They observed one dimple
along each grain boundary in small grain size samples
and more than one dimple along a grain boundary in
large grain size samples. As a consequence, fracture
toughness increased significantly with increased grain
size in small grain size samples, then exhibited a weak
dependence on grain size in large grain size samples.
The transition between a strong and weak grain size
effect appears to correlate with the onset of multiple
void formation along a grain boundary. The rela-
tively high fracture toughness of titanium alloys
heat-treated to obtain a Widmanstatten structure is
derived from fracture along the elongated a platelets
[59]. Fracture along elongated a platelets results in
pronounced crack plane deviations (crack path tor-
tuosity). These crack plane deviations require the
crack to travel over a greater distance and require
more energy for propagation than compared to crack
growth during flat fracture [14, 15, 591. Void nu-
cleation at phase boundaries has been reported in
1040 W. M. GARRISONJR and N. R. MOODY

SYMBOL 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 e l 0
% Si 2.6 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 9.613.2

d 9.4 2.6 3.6 5.1 6.1 6.6 9.6 II.2 12.6 6.9 6.9

STRESS - STRUCTURE PARAMETER (X io3 psi - MICRONS I’*)

Fig. 4. A plot of the fraction of particles which have fractured as function of ~d”‘/f”~, where D is the
true applied stress, d is the particle diameter, and f is the particle volume fraction. The material is an
alum&m alloy containing various amounts of silicon and undissolved silicon particles [47]. (Reprinted
with permission from Trans. metall. Sot. 239, 271 (1967), a publication of the Metallurgical Society,
Warrendale, PA 15086, U.S.A.)

other two-phase alloys such as, for example, dual-
phase steels [198].
Voids have also been found to nucleate at sites
other than second-phase particles in age hardened
metastable /l titanium alloys. These alloys deform
inhomogeneously by coplanar slip. As shown by
Gysler et al. [16], voids nucleate at slip band inter-
sections with grain boundaries and other slip bands
resulting in ductile intergranular and faceted failures.
Unless studied in detail, the role of void nucleation
at slip band intersections may be overlooked. As
demonstrated by Williams et al. [17] in a study of
metastable jl titanium alloys, failure appeared to
occur by cleavage at low magnification. However,
examination of TEM replicas at high magnification
revealed that the “cleavage” facets were covered by
parallel rows of small, equiaxed dimples. A similar
approach applied to hydrogen-induced faceted frac-
ture of IN903 [60-62] showed that microvoids also
formed at slip band intersections. Single crystal
studies [18, 191 found that failure can initiate by
microvoid nucleation at the intersection of intense
shear bands. The use of high voltage electron micro-
scopy during deformation of 304 stainless steel [20]
revealed that failure in this polycrystalline alloy can
also initiate at slip band intersections. Similar studies
by Robertson and Birnbaum (631 of nickel showed
that voids formed at slip band intersections or dis-
location cell walls during straining.
In this section, experimental studies of void nu-
cleation at second-phase particles have been sum-
marized. These studies suggest that void nucleation at
low strains will be favored by large particle size, high
interfacial stresses, high matrix strength, weak bond-
ing between the matrix and particle, and high particle
volume fraction. In addition, it has been pointed out
that void nucleation does not always occur at second-
phase particles. However, it is emphasized that non-
particle related void nucleation is not as prevalent
and important as particle related void nucleation.
With the exception of titanium alloys, ductile fracture
of engineering alloys usually begins with the initiation
of voids at second-phase particles.
II.A.2 Modelling void nucleation at particles. The
experimental results presented in the previous
section show that the initiation of voids at second-
phase particles can occur by two mechanisms:
(1) decohesion of the particle-matrix interface which
begins at particular points on the interface or (2) by
fracture of the particle. While void nucleation is often
quantified by a nucleation strain, the nucleation
strain does not appear to be an absolute quantity for
a given type of second-phase particle. Factors which
influence the nucleation strain appear to be the
 Ductile fracture
strength of the particle-matrix interface, the stress
state, and the flow strength of the matrix. For
nucleation by particle-matrix decohesion, there is
substantial evidence which suggests nucleation is
easier at larger particles, although this point is de-
bated [23,64,65] and Rosenfield [24] has suggested
the evidence for this size effect is not unequivocal. In
addition, there appears to be a second size effect-a
transition from void nucleation by particle-matrix
decohesion to void nucleation by particle fracture.
Both continuum and dislocation approaches have
been taken to modelling void nucleation. Some of
these modelling efforts will be now summarized in a
chronological order. In all of these models the
second-phase particle is assumed to be much harder
than the matrix and to deform only elastically.
Gurland and Plateau appear to be the first to
model void initiation and their interest was in deter-
mining the conditions required for void nucleation by
particle fracture [66]. They suggested a necessary
condition for particle fracture was that the strain
energy released by particle fracture be greater than
the surface energy of the crack surfaces. Assuming
the stress field of the particle and of the crack had
dimensions of the same magnitude as the particle,
they gave an approximate expression of the applied
stress, u, required for particle fracture,
1 Ey I’*
fJ=-- ,
q0a
where q is a stress concentration factor, a is the
particle diameter, E is a weighted average of Young’s
moduli of the particle and the matrix and y is the
specific surface energy of the crack within the par-
ticle. This approach predicts that the stress required
for particle fracture will increase with decreasing
particle size and with the bulk fracture toughness of
the material constituting the second-phase particle.
Ashby appears to have been the first to propose a
model for void nucleation by particle-matrix deco-
hesion [37]. Ashby suggested that the most plausible
approach was that particle matrix decohesion would
occur when a critical stress was achieved at the
interface. Ashby, considering a particle engulfed by a
slip band, suggested that the loops encircling the
particle could result, via secondary slip, in an array
of prismatic loops. The vacancy loops would result in
tensile stresses on the particle-matrix interface given
by
CR
a,-jg,
where c is the plastic strain, R is the radius of the
particle, b is the matrix Burger’s vector and 1
the length of the array of prismatic loops. Ashby
suggested that in considering an array of particles,
1 could be equated with half the particle planar
spacing, or for widely separated particles, that I could
1041
be regarded as the spacing of active slip bands. If void
nucleation is reached at a critical stress u, then this
stress will be achieved at lower strains for larger
particles. Rosenfield [24] has noted that the model
does not incorporate other possible effects such as
stress state or the stress intensification at the interface
discussed by Gurland and Plateau [66]. Rosentield
[24] suggested the tensile stress at the interface could
result from summing the contributions of several
effects.
a,=a,+qa +a,,
where bT is the stress derived by Ashby, qcr is the
intensification of the stress suggested by Gurland and
Plateau and C~ would be the hydrostatic pressure or
tension. We note here that this list of contributions
to the interfacial stress has not been exhausted; other
contributions are possible. For example, there could
be stresses at the interface generated during heat-
treatment if the particle and the matrix have different
coefficients of expansion [67-761. To the best of our
knowledge, such stresses have not been studied with
respect to void nucleation.
Tanaka et al. determined the critical strain for void
nucleation by decohesion of the particle-matrix inter-
face for a system consisting of an elastically defor-
ming spherical inclusion and a plastically deforming
matrix for the case of uniaxial tension [77]. Their
calculations suggest that for particle diameters
greater than about 500 A, the energy criterion is
satisfied at very low strains. However, it is not clear
whether a purely continuum model can be used at
such small particle sizes. Tanaka et al. also con-
sidered the criterion that void nucleation will occur
when the stress at the interface exceeds a critical level,
assumed to be the theoretical strength of the particle
or matrix, whichever is lower. These calculations
suggest a critical matrix strain for decohesion which,
unlike the results of Ashby, is independent of particle
size.
Brown and Stobbs were the next to model void
nucleation by decohesion of the particle-matrix inter-
face [78]. Like Ashby, their model was derived in the
context of a study of work hardening. Brown and
Stobbs suggested that void nucleation would not
occur unless the elastic energy stored within the
particle, and presumably lost when void nucleation
occurred, was greater than the surface energy associ-
ated with the formation of the void. They took the
elastic energy stored in the particle as
where up*is a measure of the incompatibility between
the matrix and particle deformation, p* is the shear
modulus of the particle and r,, is the particle radius.
They took the increase in energy of the system due to
the formation of the new surfaces of the void and the
elimination of the matrix-particle interface as 4ny&
1042 W. M. GARRISXN
JR and N. R.
where y is yM+ yp - ypM.Thus for void nucleation to
occur
For the copper-silica system they investigated, and
making rather specific assumptions as to nature of
the operating dislocation mechanisms, they found
+(X->‘p(!!>‘;
and estimated the minimum strain required for void
nucleation as
371~ u2r0 ‘I4
6:
>K&EZ ( > ’
where a is a constant governing the strength of forest
hardening. This form predicts that the nucleation
strain will increase with the particle size.
Sundstrom’s contribution to modeling of void nu-
cleation, although restricted solely to elastic defor-
mation within both the matrix and the inclusion,
introduced two new modeling concepts [42]. He was
the first to incorporate the idea that decohesion
would begin at the poles of the particle parallel to the
tensile direction and then propagate along the inter-
face. In addition, he postulated that the hemi-
spherical cap thus formed must extend to some
critical size before it would be stable. Both of these
concepts are incorporated in the later and much more
general theory of Fisher and Gurland 183,841.
For the purely elastic deformation considered,
Sundstrom’s results are expressed in terms of a
critical stress required for a stable crack to form at
the particle-matrix interface. This critical stress in-
creases with decreasing particle size and as the work
of adhesion increases. While this work of adhesion is
not formally defined it is assumed to be a constant for
a particular system and to be independent of particle
size. It has units of energy/unit area and presumably
it is equal to yw + yp - yup used in previous models.
Perhaps the most influential work done on void
initiation was that reported by Argon et al.
[64,65,79,80]. In their modeling they suggest for
larger (diameter>> 100 A) particles that voids will
initiate when the radial stress at the particle-matrix
interface exceeds some critical level. They then argue,
based on an hypothesis of Rhee and McClintock [81],
that the radial interfacial stress (r~,~)will be bounded
as
;k so,,-a,s2k,
where the lower bound is for a non-hardening ma-
terial and the upper bound is for a linear hardening
material. The flow stress in shear is k and uT is the
MOODY
negative pressure or hydrostatic component of the
stress. As the flow stress in tension is very close to the
mean value of the limits, they suggest
where Y(E,) is the flow stress in the region of the
second-phase particle at the average local plastic
strain within the region if the particle were not
present. There is no effect of particle size in this
approach and it must be corrected if the second-phase
particles are sufficiently closely spaced that their
stress fields overlap. They further argue that a distinct
size effect appears only when the particle volume
fraction is sufficiently high for the particle to interact
and that local variations of particle volume fraction
exist. This makes it possible for some larger than
average particles to be nearest neighbors at a spacing
equal to or smaller than the average spacing. They
construct a formalism by which one can correct for
this effect of particle-particle interaction.
Argon and co-workers then considered three types
of void initiating particles: spheroidized cementite in
a 1045 steel, chromium particles in a copper matrix
and Ti(C,N) in what apparently was an overaged
maraging steel. They studied void nucleation in these
systems using notched as well as axisymmetric tensile
specimens. For each specimen they determined the
distance along the tensile axis below the fracture
surface where no void nucleation was observed. From
their calculations of strain and stress distributions in
such tensile specimens they were able to assign to this
point a nucleation strain, a flow stress Y(cg) and a
value for cr. From this they were able to calculate the
critical stress required for decohesion of the
particle-matrix interface. They found that voids were
more easily nucleated at larger cementite particles
than at smaller ones; this was explained in terms of
the particle-particle interactions. Their data sug-
gested no such influence of particle size in the Cu-Ct
system where the volume fraction of chromium par-
ticles was small (S- 0.0059).
Goods and Brown [82] present in their overview of
void initiation a new model based on the previous
work of Brown and Stobbs. They assume that the
condition for void nucleation is
where aH is the hydrostatic pressure, or is the flow
stress (Y(Z,) in the terminology of Argon and co-
workers), g1 is the interfacial stress required for
particle-matrix decohesion and 6, is a local stress
at the interface resulting from dislocation storage.
Writing the local stress as
 Ductile fracture
and assuming that the void initiating particles control
the flow stress according to
where c,, is Orowan stress, they derive the following
expression for the nucleation strain:
This expression predicts that the nucleation strain
will increase with particle size. While data are
presented to support this approach many of the data
are from studies of spheroidized cementite in steels.
While it is true that in the materials studied the
reported nucleation strains appear to increase with
increasing carbide size, the yield strengths also de-
creased. Decreasing yield strength is believed to result
in higher nucleation strains.
The most recent attempt to model void nucleation
is due to Fisher and Gurland [83,84]. While the
model was developed to analyze results of experi-
mental studies in spheroidized steels it appears to be
very general. They adopted two criteria for void
initiation. The first is that the radial stress at the
particle-matrix interface must exceed some critical
stress and the second that the energy change associ-
ated with void nucleation must be sufficient to pro-
vide a stable configuration. While many of the results
are obtained through numerical calculations they find
that void nucleation is favored by a large particle size,
high flow stress, high stress triaxiality and a large
plastic strain. This size effect emerges independent
of particle interactions, Furthermore, unlike earlier
energy balance requirements for void nucleation,
their energy criterion is not generally satisfied even
for large deformations and reasonably large particles.
II.A.3 Void nucleation: summary. Void nucleation
can occur at particles by decohesion of the
particle-matrix interface or particle fracture. Experi-
mental studies suggest that in the case of
particle-matrix decohesion the nucleation strain will
decrease as the strength of the particle-matrix bond
decreases, as the particle size increases, as the stress
triaxiality decreases, as the flow strength of the
matrix decreases and as the particle volume fraction
increases. Particle fracture will be favored over inter-
facial decohesion by increasing the particle size,
increasing the strength of the interfacial bonding and
by non-equiaxed particle shapes. In addition, there is
evidence that the nature of the plastic flow of the
matrix, as well as matrix strength, is important in
void nucleation.
There have been many attempts to model void
nucleation for the case of particle-matrix decohesion.
All accept the premise that the stress at the interface
must exceed some critical level before void nucleation
can occur. There are, however, differences between
1043
the models in how they treat the energy criterion.
There is no agreement between the models as to how
nucleation strain will depend on size.
1I.B. Void growth
After nucleation the voids will expand to a volume
and shape determined by material properties and test
conditions. Plastic deformation is apparently re-
quired for void growth. Indeed, void walls sometimes
exhibit wavy markings, which are the result of wavy
or serpentine glide on slip planes which intersect the
growing void. While dislocation motion is believed to
be responsible for void growth, few dislocation
models for the growth of voids have been developed.
Ashby, in his article on the work hardening of
dispersion-hardened crystals [371, has proposed a
dislocation based void growth model. According to
this model, once the void is nucleated, the ratio of
AV, the increase in volume, to the volume V of the
void nucleating particle will scale as
AV a
-w-
v 2’
where a is the shear strain on the primary slip band.
As noted by Rosentield [24], this model predicts
growth rates which are much too small. In addition,
the model is based only on the dislocation mech-
anisms which cause high localized stresses around
particles and does not suggest how these dislocations
provide for void growth. McLean has suggested a
dislocation model for void growth in which edge
dislocations, moving towards the nucleated void,
merge with the void resulting in its enlargement;
however, quantitative dislocation based descriptions
of void growth have not been developed [85].
Modelling void enlargement has proven, and
continues to be, an active area within continuum
mechanics. The pioneer in the continuum approach
is McClintock [86,87]. He developed equations de-
scribing growth of voids of different geometries
under different conditions.
McClintock’s basic approach was to obtain solu-
tions or approximations to the behavior of linear-
hardening materials and of nonhardening plastic
materials. He then postulated that the behavior of
moderately strain hardening materials could be ob-
tained by interpolating the solutions for linear hard-
ening and non-hardening plastic materials. McClin-
tack began by obtaining equations describing the
growth of cylindrical voids in both a linear hardening
material under axisymmetric stress and for a rigid-
nonhardening material under axisymmetric defor-
mation. The two equations are given in Table 1. He
then provided a means of obtaining the behavior of
moderately work hardening materials by inserting n
as shown in Table 1 using the relation
sin fia
lim - =a.
B-0 ( /9 >
1044 W. M. GARRISONJR and N. R. MOODY

Following earlier work by Berg [88], McClintock then ” = 0.15

obtained an equation describing the growth of a 2w = 180’

cyclindrical void of elliptical cross-section in a linear

hardening matrix under arbitrary biaxial loading.
This solution is shown in Table 1. By analogy with
the results for circular cylinders, McClintock argued
that the equation given in Table 1 would be a
reasonable approximation for the growth of a cylin-
drical void of elliptical cross-section in a rigid non-
hardening material subject to arbitrary biaxial load-
ing. The same method as used earlier was used to
estimate the void growth equation for moderately
hardening materials.
McClintock, Kaplan and Berg extended the Mc-
Clintock analysis for non-rotational hole growth in
shear bands [89]. The mean radius (R) of a void in
shear bands was found to increase as

[ 1,
(a) (b) (cl
--1 dR =-----sinh
1
(1-n): In we/W = 0.07 In “b/Ly ‘0.25 In WC/Iv = 0.37
R dy 2(1-n)
T, = 4wo T, = 2W, T,=4W,

where 7 is the shear stress in the band, u is the normal
stress across it and n is the strain hardening coefficient
in 7 = 7g”. In 1971, McClintock [90] published an
order of magnitude estimate for the growth of ellip-
soidal holes by taking the averages of the three
principal stresses
1 dR
-- =&sinh[(l -n)$],
R dz
where R is the mean of three semiaxes of the void, CI
is a constant on the order of unity, 6 is the equivalent ment has been presented by Rice and Tracey [92] and
plastic strain, and a, is the mean stress.
Perra [91] evaluated the McClintock equations
with cylinders of graphic embedded in blocks of high
purity copper. Notched and unnotched plane strain
tensile specimens were machined from these blocks
such that the graphite cylinders were aligned perpen-
dicular to the tensile direction in the centers of the
specimens. The growth of the cylindrical voids was
determined metallographically. Perra’s work suggests
Fig. 5. Traces of observed void dimensions and the predic-
tions of McClintock’s model. FV, is the initial specimen
thickness and W is the current thickness. r, is the specimen
width 1911. (Reprinted with permission of Mark Perra,
author.)
the McClintock equations greatly underestimate the
extent of void growth (Fig. 5), but confirm the
importance of high stress-triaxiality in void growth
(Fig. 6).
Another continuum description of void enlarge-
further developed by Tracey [93]. Rice. and Tracey
considered a spherical void in a rigid-perfectly plastic
material. They found that for the case where the
remote strain field consisted of a tensile extension at
rate i, that the following was a good approximation
for a wide range of stress states.
R
- =0.2*3exp[ ++:I,
iR

Table 1. McClintock’s void growth equations

Nonhardening Intermediate Linear hardening
n=O O<nz%l n=l

1 ,n;_J;r)[d(3
Elliptical cavity

1
hr A = &36 ) sinh J(3) (u, + ub) (1 -n),/(3)(a,+ ub)
& --[ 2 26 26
 Ductile fracture 1045

.o- I I I I I Mudry [95], their results suggest that at low volume

fractions of inclusions a will extrapolate to 0.5. These
results are summarized in Figs 7 and 8.
The common feature of the foregoing continuum
I
studies of hole growth is that relative growth rates are
.o - amplified over imposed strain rates by a factor rising
exponentially as a function of the ratio of the mean
normal stress to the effective or equivalent stress. The
second basic result is that work-hardening decreases
void growth rates for a given imposed strain rate.
However, these analyses are based on the growth of
.o -
isolated holes in an infinite media with the assump-
tion of macroscopic incompressibility, so their use
can be justified only for the case in which holes are
very small compared to the hole spacing. The studies

O_ 1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
EOUIVALENT STRAIN AT IO% DAMAGE, &

XEL762-6378
3i’
2.5
1 /
Fig. 6. The influence of stress state, triaxility (~,,,,/a) on the E / / j
strain required to extend the internal void over 10% of the
neck of the specimen [91].

where R is the average void radius, a, is the mean

normal stress and z0 is yield stress in shear. Tracey
extended this approach to cylindrical voids in work
hardening materials and introduced some measure of
void-void interaction by considering each void in its
own domain of transverse dimension equal to the
void spacing. Void-void interaction was incorporated
by using finite body analysis to approximate the
acceleration in void growth due to particle-particle
STRESS TRIAXIALITY RATIO (urn/ a)
interactions. He found, as McClintock’s equations
suggest, that for a constant stress state void growth Fig. 7. A plot of ln{[ln(R/R,,)]/E} as a function of stress state
for three materials representing three different inclusion
decelerates as the work hardening coefficient is in- volume fractions. The results can be compared to the
creased. He also found for a tixed stress state and theoretical Rice and Tracey equation [94]. (Reprinted with
work hardening coefficient that the rate of void permission from Engng. Fract. Me& 22, 989 (1985). Per-
growth increased with the amount of strain. gamon Journals Ltd.)
There has been no test of the work of Rice and
Tracey which is as elegant as that of Perra’s test of 2, , T
I
McClintock’s equations for the growth of cylindrical
voids. However, Marini et al. have examined the rate
of growth of voids nucleated at large
(diameter = 60 pm) A&O, particles in powder-
processed low alloy steels tempered to a low strength
level [94]. They considered materials with the volume
fractions of A&O, of 0.02 and 0.005. For their
analysis of void growth they used an integrated form
of the Rice and Tracey equation

ln(R/&) = ac exp(/?a,/a)
t,~__--’
E 1
o -0.28 RICE AND TRACEY

replacing J(3) a,,,/2z, by 3/2(a,,,/u,) to account for

work-hardening and determined CLand /3 experi-
mentally. R,, and R are the average void radii before
o? 10-4 2 5
VOLUME
l0-s
FRACTION
2
OF
5
INCLUSIONS
10.’ 2

deformation and at the current value of the equiv-

alent plastic strain (c) respectively. They found Fig. 8. The pre-exponential factor a used by Marini et al.
plotted as a function of initial inclusion volume fraction
/I = 3/2, but that CIvaried with the volume fraction of [94]. (Reprinted with permission from Engng. Frucr. Med.
void nucleating particles. Including the results of 22, 989 (1985). Pergamon Journals Ltd.)
1046 W. M. GARRW)N JR and N. R. MOODY
by McClinrock and by Rice and Tracey have neg-
lected void interactions altogether. The work by
Traccy only very approximately accounts for void-
void interaction effects. The analysis of void growth
should address the crucial matters of finite shape
changes, interactions between neighboring voids, and
the unstable coalescence of neighboring voids or void
arrays. This necessarily involves formulations for
large deformations. Some early work of this type has
been reported by Needleman [96].
Investigations to date suggest that triaxiality is
important in determining both the rate of void
growth and the void shape. This strong effect of
triaxiality is included in both the continuum models
discussed. There does not appear to be any test as to
the role of work hardening capacity on the rate of
void growth. However, there is some evidence that
strength level does influence the rate of void growth.
Cox and Low have studied the void growth rates
for voids initiated at large manganese sulfides in 4340
and at Ti(C, N) particles in a 250 grade maraging
steel [9]. For both steels the rate of void growth
observed in notched tensile specimens were much
larger than those observed in axisymmetric tensile
specimens. Moreover, Cox and Low’s work suggests
that the rate of growth of the void width is much
lower than the rate of void depth, when stress tri-
axiality is low. In addition, the voids nucleated at the
larger inclusions tended to grow faster.
The data of Floreen and Hayden [97] and of Psioda
[29] suggest that the void growth rate increases with
matrix strength. Floreen and Hayden measured from
cross-sections of tensile specimens the length (parallel
to tensile direction) and width of the 10 largest voids
as a function of strain for two microstructures. (The
voids presumably nucleated at fractured Ti(C, N)
inclusions.) The first microstructure was an annealed
condition which had a yield strength of about 135 ksi.
Their paper suggests this was as-received material
which is normally heavily overaged. The second
microstructure was that obtained by aging to obtain
a yield strength of 279 ksi. As shown in Fig. 9, the
void growth is more rapid for the high strength
microstructure. Psioda also examined the influence of
yield strength on the rate of growth of voids in a
maraging steel and found the rate increased with
increasing matrix strength.
In summary, the continuum predictions for the
growth of an isolated void predict that the rate of
void growth will increase with void size and that the
growth rates are amplified over imposed strain rates
by a factor rising exponentially as a function of the
ratio of the mean normal stress to the effective stress.
These equations are in qualitative agreement with
experimental observations but underpredict the ex-
tent of void growth.
1I.C Void coalescence
II.C.1 Mechanisms of void coalescence. The final
step in the idealized three stage process of ductile
01
0 2 .4 6 .B IO I i
TRUE STRAIN
Fig. 9. Comparison of void lengths and widths as a function
of strain for maraging steel in low strength (annealed) and
high strength (aged) conditions [97]. (Reprinted with
permission from Scripfa Metall. 4, 87 (1970). Pergamon
Journals Ltd.)
fracture is void coalescence. In this stage the growing
voids link together, and actual fracture can proceed,
either stably or unstably. It is useful to consider two
processes by which growing voids coalesce. The first
would occur in a material containing only one
population of void nucleating particles activated
during the fracture process (there may be other
particles but they are bonded to the matrix so
strongly that they do not nucleate voids). Co-
alescence occurs when the voids nucleated at these
particles impinge. In the second, voids are first
nucleated at particles in a particular particle popu-
lation (the one with particles most weakly bound to
the matrix). These voids grow as the material is
plastically deformed. At some point, voids are nu-
cleated at a second particle distribution. These par-
ticles are generally much smaller, more finely dis-
persed and more strongly bonded to the matrix, so
that the strains required to nucleate voids at these
particles are higher. Thus the voids which form first
coalesce by the growth and coalescence of the voids
nucleated at the second particle population. This
process is often referred to as void sheet coalescence
[6,22]. Experiments suggest that the coalescence
event is, in general, rapid, occurring over a small
interval of macroscopic strain [98].
Two mechanisms have been proposed for co-
alescence by void impingement. In the mechanism
suggested by Cottrell [99], the ligaments between
growing voids would simply neck down to a “point”.
Thus a fracture surface of such a failure would be
voids of a rather uniform size and spacing with the
ridges around the dimples representing material
drawn to a knife-edge fracture of zero cross-section.
A second mechanism which would result in direct
impingement of the growing voids is the slipping off
mechanism observed in the tensile fractures of single
crystals [loo]. One should be able to distinguish
 Ductile fracture
between the slipping off and necking down processes
by cross-sectioning fracture surfaces. While the au-
thors are unaware of studies of the mechanisms of
direct void impingement, there exist many examples
of direct void impingement. For example, it has been
reported that for certain heat-treatment conditions
the fracture surfaces of maraging steels consist of
equiaxed dimples nucleated at titanium carbides [9].
In addition, fractures of spheroidized steels have
been claimed to be through direct impingement of
voids nucleated at the carbides [ 101, 1021. An ex-
ample of direct void impingement from work by
L. Thompson [103], is shown in Fig. 10(a). Here,
voids nucleated at large inclusions are seen to
coalesce by direct impingement for a Fe-Mn-Cr
stainless steel. In Fig. 10(b), the voids nucleated at
large inclusions do not always impinge directly, but
are often separated by regions of very small dimples.
The classic example of void sheet coalescence by
the nucleation of voids at a second particle popu-
lation in a region of shear localization between larger
particles is of course that of Cox and LOW 191.They
observed, as shown in Fig. 11, that large voids
nucleated at sulfide inclusions in 4340 steel coalesced
Fig. 10. Scanning electron microscope fractographs from
Charpy impact specimens of (a) 20Mn-13Cr-O.lN-1 SSi
steel fractured at room temperature, and (b) 16Mn-13Cr
alloy fractured at - 196°C (1031. (Reprinted with permission
from Mechanical Properiies and Phase Transformations in
Engineering Materials (edited by Antolovich, S. D., Ritchie,
R. 0. and Gerberich, W. W.). The Metallurgical Society,
420 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15086, (1985).)
1047
by a void sheet mechanism in which the voids within
the sheet were nucleated at carbides precipitated on
tempering.
While it is commonly stated that void coalescence
in maraging steels is by direct impingement, Roesch
and Henry [104] have found that once the inter-
metallics, precipitated on aging of these steels, reach
a critical size they too can nucleate voids. Therefore,
one would expect in some aging conditions for the
large voids nucleated at the Ti(C, N) inclusions to
coalesce by a void sheet process where the sheets are
formed by voids nucleated at the intermetallics.
Low observed in 2000 and 7000 series aluminium
alloys that the large voids nucleated at constituent
particles often coalesced by the formation of void
sheets [28,105, 1061. The void sheets were formed by
the growth and coalescence of voids nucleated at
dispersoids, submicron-sized particles introduced in
the alloy to control grain growth.
In addition, void sheet coalescence can connect
larger voids by nucleating microvoids in processes
which do not require a second particle population.
In a study of hydrogen effects on the y’ strengthened
superalloy IN903, Moody and Greulich observed
that voids nucleated at fractured matrix carbides
(NbC) and coalesced by a void sheet mechanism [60].
Void sheet formation occurred at grain boundary
carbides in uncharged samples and along coplanar
slip bands in hydrogen charged samples. High
magnification fractography and TEM of strained
samples suggested that the voids along the coplanar
slip bands formed at slip band intersections.
Ordinarily void sheet coalescence brings to mind
the classic micrograph in the paper by Cox and Low
[9]. However, Rogers defined the term void sheet
coalescence in rather more general terms [6,22] to
include notch and strain localization effects. Puttick
[5] found in smooth axisymmetric tensile specimens
of OFHC copper that voids form first in the center
of the tensile specimen and coalesce to form an
internal notch (Fig. 12). Rogers observed that the
notch tends to concentrate or localize the defor-
mation at its tip in narrow bands of high shear strain
at an angle of 50”-60” to the transverse plane. Under
the combined action of the applied tensile stress and
the resulting shear strain, “sheets” of voids are
nucleated in these bands, growing until coasescence
(by impingement) occurs, producing local fracture of
the “void” sheet. Thus, the requirement for void
sheet coalescence is that voids nucleate and coalesce
on a nominally 2D surface defined by a region of
strain localization. In general, void sheet coalescence
does not require a second population of void nucle-
ating particles. Void sheet coalescence defined in
general terms is observed in many different situ-
ations.
Examples of void sheet coalescence in which a
second particle population is not required are various
types of grain boundary fracture. Ductile inter-
granular fracture can occur in steels when they are
1048 W. M. GARFCFQN JR
Fig. 11. Coalescence of two voids by a void sheet mechanism in 4340 steel [9].
overheated [107-1091. Overheating occurs when a
steel is austenitized at a temperature sufficiently high
to dissolve some or all of the sulfide inclusions; on
quenching, sulfides precipitate at the austenite grain
boundaries. Depending on the relative amounts of
inclusions within the matrix and on the grain bound-
aries, ductile intergranular fracture can take place
[1lo]. In such situations the toughness is apparently
controlled by the spacing of the particles on the grain
boundary [l 111. Intergranular fractures are also
observed in high strength aluminium alloys [112].
Intergranular void sheet coalescence can also re-
sult if there is a precipitate-free zone. Kirman
investigated the influence of aging on the micro-
mechanisms of ductile fracture of an Al-Mg-Zn
aluminum alloy (7075) [ 1131. He found that when the
alloy was sufficiently overaged, fracture occurred
intergranularly by the coalescence of voids nucleated
at grain boundary MgZn, precipitates. The voids
nucleated preferentially at the grain boundary pre-
cipitates due to strain localization in the relatively
soft precipitate-free zone.
II.C.2 Modeling void coalescence by void sheet
formation. The mechanism of void sheet coalescence
suggests strong localization of strain between the
larger voids. It is unclear if the void sheets are the
product simply of strain localization between the
larger voids or microvoids strongly contribute to the
localization of flow between the larger voids. Experi-
ments and continuum calculations suggest that strain
concentration can occur before microvoids form, but
and N. R. MOODY
it is not clear if shear localization requires microvoid
formation in the region between the larger inclusions.
Edelson investigated strain concentration between
voids by examining copper sheets containing arrays
of holes which were coated with a strain sensitive
birefringent film [ 1141. He examined holes positioned
along 35” diagonals and holes positioned along 60”
diagonals. He found that in both arrays the local
plastic strains at the hole edges were much greater
than the macroscopic strain; furthermore, the holes
in the 35” diagonal arrays were joined by a path of
high strain, almost as high as the highest local strains
at the edge of the holes. Similar experiments and
observations have been made by Bourcier and Koss
[115].
Various numerical computations tend to corrobo-
rate these experimental observations. Needleman
[96], Nemat-nasser and Taya [116], and Tvergaard
[117] have shown in finite element calculations based
on an elastic-plastic matrix with a smooth yield
surface, that neighboring voids become linked by a
highly strained region. However, no shear band
instability would occur in these materials at realistic
strain levels [118]. Tvergaard considered a similar
initial void distribution, but permitted microvoid
nucleation. Using Gurson constitutive equations
[ 1191for a porous medium, he predicted strain local-
ization and microvoid nucleation in a narrow band
that begins at a large void, and grows into the matrix
in the direction of another large void (selected to be
at 40.8” from the initial void [118].
 Ductile fracture I1049

Fig. 12. Section through neck of a tensile specimen of copper showing profusion of voids and central crack
in the necked region [5]. (Reprinted with permission from Phil. Mag., Taylor &I Francis, Ltd. (1959).)

III. MECHANICAL PROPERTIES properties (strain to fracture for the tensile specimens
and the critical crack tip opening displacement at
In this section we will discuss the process of ductile fracture initiation in toughness type specimens) can
fracture in the context of specimens often used to be predicated in terms of microstructure and/or
assess fracture behavior. The specimen geometries to continuum treatments of the three stages of the
be discussed are: smooth axisymmetric tensile speci- ductile fracture process.
mens, notched axisymmetric tensile specimens, plane
strain tensile specimens and fatigue precracked speci- IILA Ductility of smooth axisymmetric tensile
mens such as compact tension specimens or three specimens
point bend specimens used to measure fracture initi- The most commonly reported engineering prop-
ation toughness. The topics to be addressed are the erty is the strain to fracture for a smooth axisym-
stress states and strain distributions in the particular metric tensile specimen. The strain to fracture is
geometries, the micromechanisms of the fracture equal to ln(A,/A,) where A, is the initial cross-
process, and finally the extent to which mechanical sectional area and A/ is the smallest cross-sectional
1050 JR and N. R.
W. M. GARRISON
area after fracture. Initially the cross-sectional area
remains a constant along the specimen length or
gauge length. At some strain, the uniform strain, the
specimen begins to neck. Beyond the onset of neck-
ing, strain will become concentrated in the necked
region, although plastic deformation occurs through
the length of the necked region until late in the
fracture process. The problem of necking of an
axisymmetric tensile specimen has been assessed by
Bridgman [ 1211and subsequently treated numerically
by Needleman [122], Chen [123], and Norris et al.
[124]. The analyses suggest that the effective plastic
strain (cP) is essentially uniform across the neck and
may thus be calculated from the diameter change of
the specimen. The second conclusion is that the ratio
of the mean normal stress (a,) to the equivalent
stress (5) increases as the necking progresses. In fact,
at the center of the specimen a,,,/5 can increase from
0.33 to about 0.6 at an equivalent plastic strain of 0.9
[125].
Studies of the fracture process in smooth axisym-
metric tensile specimens suggest that voids can ap-
pear well before fracture, and their volume fraction
is highest in the center of the tensile neck. This region
is the volume combining both the highest plastic
strain and the highest ratio of 0,/d. The area fraction
of voids in cross-sectioned specimens decreases as the
distance from the plane of the fracture surface
increases.
There have been a number of studies of the extent
of void growth prior to fracture and of the failure
mechanisms in axisymmetric tensile specimens.
Rogers examined the fracture process in OFHC
copper and observed that voids formed well before
fracture, with the largest voids at the center of the
neck [6,22]. His observations suggested that fracture
began at the center of the neck by the consolidation
of several voids. Complete specimen fracture then
occurred by the propagation of the central crack via
either void sheet formation or by slip (ductile cut-
ting). In a similar manner, Hancock and Mackenzie
examined the fracture behavior of two steels [ 1261
but related their observations to the true stresses and
the effective plastic strain (6,). They observed the
stress increased monotonically with KPuntil it reached
a maximum value, then dropped sharply. Metal-
lographic examination of specimens showed that
before this maximum stress was achieved discrete
holes had formed. Beyond the maximum stress, they
observed large central flaws formed either by im-
pingement of some large voids or by the linking
through void sheet coalescence of several voids.
Therefore, Hancock and Mackenzie took the strain
at the maximum stress to be the fracture strain. They
did not observe how the central flaw propagated
through the material. However, their measurement
of the central flaw size, at what they have defined as
the fracture strain, and their use of these data in
estimating the fracture initiation toughness of the
steels investigated leaves little doubt that they re-
MOODY
garded the fracture event to be the growth of this
central flaw [1271.
An important factor in determining the tensile
ductility is the volume fraction of particles. Edelson
and Baldwin investigated the effects of independent
variations of particle volume fraction and size on the
tensile properties of copper [128]. The particles
included voids and particles of molybdenum, lead,
alumina, graphite and iron. They found that tensile
ductility depended primarily on the total volume
fraction of particles and voids. Their alloys were
prepared by powder methods and all materials to
which inclusions were deliberately added contained
2% voids. Their plot of tensile ductility as a function
of total volume fraction of inclusions and voids in
Fig. 13 largely supports their conclusion. However,
the data are not totally conclusive as, for example,
the ductility varies from about 0.15 to 0.5 at an
inclusion volume fraction of about 0.7. The general
trend observed by Edelson and Baldwin has been
confirmed in investigations of steels [129, 1301 and
for other tensile geometries [130, 1601. However,
while it might be argued that particle spacing does
not influence tensile ductility, there is little doubt that
particle shape can be important. For example, in
steels containing inclusions elongated in the rolling
direction, the tensile ductility depends on how the
tensile specimen is oriented with respect to the rolling
direction [131, 1321.
The work of Edelson and Baldwin and others
show the smooth axisymmetric tensile ductility will
decrease with increasing particle volume fraction.
Continuum treatments of void growth can qual-
itatively explain this trend but they are insufficient to
predict fracture strains. For example, the Rice and
Tracey equation for the growth of an initially
spherical void is
dR
- = 0.32 exp(l.5 ~,,,/a) dr,
R
where R is the average radius of the void. On
integrating with the assumption that stress state
remains constant and there is no void nucleation
strain, the fracture strain is given by
Z, = ln(R,/R,)/O.32 exp(l.5 ~,,,/a),
where R, and Riare the final and initial void radii
respectively and for a smooth axisymmetric tensile
specimen a,,,/6 is initially 0.33. In applying this
equation we will take 0.32 exp(l.5 a,/e) to be about
0.50. Then, in absence of R//R, measurements from
the center of the fracture surface, one might take Rf
to be X,/2, where X0 is some measure of spacing of
the voids or particles. A variety of possible choices
of X0 exist [133]. These include the mean free path,
the average nearest neighbor distance on a plane and
the average nearest neighbor distance in a volume.
 Ductile fracture 1051

PRESENT WORK
I
0 COPPER- IRON-MOLY
0 COPPER HOLES
x COPPER Cl#?OMlUM
0 COPPER AWMINA
A COPFER IRON
P COPPER MOLYBDENUM
ZWILSKY 8 GRANT
( COPPER ALUMINA
1.0 . 3 COPPER SILICA

VOLUME FRACTI0N.f

Fig. 13. A plot of Ekielson and Baldwin’s observations of the influence of void and inclusion volume
fraction on the ductility obtained in smooth axisymmetric tensile specimens [128].(From Bdelson, B. I.
and Baldwin, W. M., Jr., The Effect of Second Phases on the Mechanical Properties of Alloys, Trans.
ASM, 55, 238 (1962). American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH 44073, U.S.A.)

For spherical particles these spacings can be written
as
i = (4/3) %(l -f)lf
mean free path,
AZ= 0.72 &f -‘I2
average nearest neighbor distance on a
plane,
A3 = 0.89 &f-l”
average nearest neighbor distance in a
volume,
where f is the particle volume fraction and & is the
.
average particle radius [1331.
Calculations of the fracture strain using the Rice
and Tracey equation for void growth for these three
choices of X,, are compared with the Edelson and
Baldwin data in Fig. 14. All three spacings give the
observed trend of ductility decreasing with increasing
particle volume fraction in the case of voids or
particles very weakly bound to the matrix. Using the
average 3D nearest neighbor spacing actually gives a
reasonable fit to the Edelson and Baldwin data over
a wide range of volume fractions.
Using actual measurements of R//R,, however,
it appears that the Rice and Tracey equations for
void growth overestimate the fracture strain. Recent
studies [60-62] of hydrogen effects on the fracture of
the y ’ strengthened superalloy IN903, which failed by
microvoid coalescence illustrates this point. The
voids initiated by fracture of matrix carbides in both
hydrogen charged and uncharged samples. However,
final failure did not occur by impingement of these
voids but by void sheet formation at grain boundary
carbides in uncharged samples and at slip band
intersections in hydrogen charged samples. The
amount of void sheet formation increased signifi-
cantly with a corresponding decrease in the amount
of void growth around the matrix carbides as the
hydrogen concentration increased. To determine the
applicability of void growth equations to calculation
of the fracture strain, the extent of void growth at
failure corresponding to the average-sized matrix
carbide was determined from fracture surface meas-
urements. The average matrix carbide diameter
(6.3 pm) and volume fraction (0.003) were measured
in a previous study [62].
As shown in Fig. 15(a), a linear relationship exists
between the measured fracture strain and the loga-
rithm of the measured ratio of final void radius to
void nucleating carbide radius as predicted by the
models of McClintock [86], Rice and Tracey [92,93]
and Marini et al. [94]. However, the fracture strains
predicted from these models differ significantly as
shown in Fig. 15(b). (In addition, the predicted values
do not include the nucleation strain of 0.08 for the
average sized carbide.) Only predictions from the
model of McClintock [86] are in reasonable agree-
ment with measured values. However, this model is
for cylindrical voids, albeit oriented such that growth
1052 W. M. GARREONJR and N. R. MCXDY

0 COPPER PlJMINA
A COPPER IRON
0 COPPER MOLYBDENUM
ZWILSKY EL GRANT

Q 0.1 0.2
VOLUME FRACTION,f

Fig, 14. The results of Edelson and Baldwin compared to plots of predicted tensile ductilities using the
Rice and Tracey equation for void growth assuming inclusion spacings of (a) mean free path; (b) average
nearest neighbor distance on a plane; and (c) average nearest-neighbor spacing in a volume.

) (a)
occurs in the transverse direction parallel with the
fracture strain measurements, whereas the voids that
formed around the carbides were spherical. The
spherical void model of Rice and Tracey [92,93] and
the empirical modification of this model by Marini et
al. [94] to account for void interactions overpredict
the fracture strains. These results suggest that
void-void interactions and deformation character
(coplanar slip) may exert a strong influence on void
growth.
In (RJR,) Another approach to predicting tensile ductility is
that of Brown and Embury [134]. According to their
approach, they assume that fracture occurs by rup-
(b) ture of the ligaments between voids, which occurs on
1.6 - a single plane when the void length becomes equal to
the spacing between the void nucleating particles
Rice a Trocey (Fig. 16). They assume that the strains associated
with the coalescence process will be small, and ignore
this contribution to the tensile ductility. Beginning
with these assumptions they derive an expression for
the fracture strain c~, as follows:

,=ln($)=ln(l +tg+c.)
0.2 0.3
Ef, measured

Fig. 15. (a) A plot of the correlation between tensile fracture

strain and the quantity ln(R,/R,) for IN903 charged to the
hydrogen levels shown in Table 2. (b) The measured frac-
ture strains are compared to fracture calculated using the This equation provides reasonable agreement with
various void growth equations summarized in Table 2. the experimental data they use for comparison, with
 Ductile fracture
0 -
Fig. 16. The coalescence criteria of Brown and Embury.
Coalescence will occur when the vertical void height equals
the spacing between inclusions [134]. (Reprinted with per-
mission from The Microsiructure and Design of Alloys. The
Iron and Steel Institute (1975).)
the extent of agreement depending on the value used
for t,. The derivation of their equations begins with
the assumption that the rate of void growth, dRJd6,
is given by
where R,, is the initial void radius. At the strain at
which void growth ends (t,), the void length is
2R, = 2R,(l + Q,
which is then equated to the mean planar spacing of
spherical particles, where S is the inclusion volume
fraction.
To obtain the fracture strain [e, = h&4,/A,)] they
then essentially take
A0
-=1+e,
Ar
and, modifying this to incorporate nucleation strain
the following equation is obtained:
A increased the ultimate tensile strength by almost a
a=1 +e&.+c,.
A/
These last two steps would seem to be valid only for
very small strains. In addition, the approach does not
incorporate the important role of stress state in void
growth.
Another approach to estimating tensile ductility is
that due to Rosenfield and Hahn [135]. This ap
preach combines observation of the fracture process,
continuum equations for void growth, and a fracture
1053
criterion based on the concepts of fracture mechanics.
This interesting work has not received the attention
it deserves although Stout and Gerberich have used
it in modeling fracture initiation toughness [136].
Hahn and Rosenfield used McClintock’s equations
for the growth of cylindrical voids. They integrated
this equation from zero strain to the fracture strain,
using the Bridgman analysis to obtain the current
values of the stress in terms of 5 and n to obtain an
equation In@/&) = F(i, n). Do is the initial particle
diameter and D is the maximum stable hole diameter.
They defined fracture as the condition where one
large void (or a small group of neighboring voids that
have coalesced) becomes unstable and grows rapidly
as a crack. Regarding this crack as a critical flaw,
they suggest that its size is stress sensitive and take
D (a/)* = const ,
where a,is the equivalent stress at fracture. Using this
equation it is possible to estimate the fracture strain
if F and -0, are known for one reference condition
from the relationship.
Finally, while the work by LeRoy et al. [ 1371offers
no new approaches as to how one might model tensile
ductility, it is probably the most comprehensive at-
tempt to calculate the tensile fracture strains through
continuum models and measured parameters charac-
terizing the microstructure and their influence on the
fracture process.
1II.B Ductility of notched axisymmetric tensile
specimens
The fact that re-entrant notches can influence
fracture behavior has been known for some time
[138] and led to standardized impact tests for
notched specimens [139, 1401. However, the earliest
reference to the use of notched axisymmetric tensile
specimens appears to be that of Ludwik and Schau
[141]. They conducted smooth and notched tensile
tests of a low strength mild steel; the smooth tensile
specimens had diameters of 1Omm and the notched
tensile specimens were 18 mm in diameter, and
1Omm in diameter at the base of the notch. They
reported that incorporating a notch, 0.4mm wide,
factor of two and lowered the reduction in area from
69% to only 22.5%. Their report contains the most
important consequences of notched tensile testing.
These are the elevation of the flow stress (notch
strengthening) and a marked decrease in the strain to
fracture.
Notch strengthening is due to the elevation of the
flow curve by what is termed plastic constraint. To
maintain equilibrium, no stresses can act normal to
the notch surface; all of the tensile load must be
1054 W. M. GARRISON
JR and N. R.
taken by the metal in the cross-section at the notch.
Therefore a mass of unstressed material exists above
and below the notch. This material in the cross-
section of the notch wants to contract laterally
because of the Poisson effect, but it is constrained by
the material above and below. This constraint causes
both radial and transverse stresses in addition to the
stresses along the tensile axis and leads to a triaxial
as opposed to uniaxial stress state. This in turn leads
to an elevation of the stress-strain curve because
higher applied stresses in the tensile direction are
needed to reach yielding. It appears that the reduced
fracture strains are the direct result in the change in
stress state. As shown in Fig. 17 the reduced tensile
ductility correlates reasonably well with the increased
stress triaxiality 11421.
While notched tests have been used to provide
qualitative information about “notch sensitivity of
materials”, they have also been used extensively in
studies of ductile fracture and in modelling fracture
initiation ahead of sharp cracks. Our interest here is
what these tests tell us about the mechanisms of
ductile fracture. Their importance is that these tensile
specimens can provide information about the role of
stress state in the various stages of ductile fracture,
nucleation, growth, coalescence and the total strain
to fracture.
Work in this area is most strongly associated with
a series of studies by investigators in the Department
of Mechanical Engineering at the University of
Glasgow. In the first paper of this series Hancock
and MacKenzie [126] utilized U-notched tensile
specimens. They used an extension of the Bridgman
50, n
A Ql (aHY-80)
v ESRtaHY-130)
IRRADIATED (ROOM
TEMP TO llOO°F)
30 - 0 24 ST ALUM.
Fig. 17. The reduction in area of notched tensile specimens
vs the reduction in area of the corresponding smooth
tension specimens divided by 3a,/d where u,,,,/@is the
triaxiality of stress state for the notched specimen [142].
(Reprinted with permission from J. eng. Mats. Tech. The
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 345 East 47
Street, NY 10017 (1978).)
MOODY
analysis by Earl and Brown [143] to show that the
stress state (o,#) varied across the specimen rising
from l/3 at the notch surface to
(a,/~?) = l/3 + ln(d/2R + 1)
at the axis of the specimens, where d is the diameter
of the specimen at the notch, R is the notch radius
and a,,,/5 at the center is used as a measure of stress
triaxiality for the specimen. Thus a,,,/5 ranged from
0.33 to 1.99. Hancock and MacKenzie used three
heats of steel: a steel designated Ql. a heat of
HY130, and a heat of electroslag remelted HY130
(HY 130/ESR). The first two heats contained inclu-
sion stringers while the HYl30/ESR heat did not.
They observed that fracture began with the nucle-
ation of voids at inclusions which coalesced to form
a large cavity at the center of the neck or notch. Also,
the strain to fracture decreased rapidly as the stress
state parameter a,,,/6 increased as shown in Fig. 18.
They also found, as shown in Fig. 18, that in the
presence of inclusion stringers, the ductilities were
much lower in the short transverse direction than in
the long transverse direction. They concluded that
void nucleation occurred at very small strains in
these materials, with void growth the dominant event
leading to failure. Quantitatively, they found that the
Rice and Tracey equation for void growth
dR
- = 0.28 exp(lSa,/C) dE,
R
provides an approximate failure criterion. For a
given steel tested in a given orientation, the fracture
strain could be expressed as
i; = a exp(- 1.5 0,/e),
where c( varied with material. Thus the Rice and
Tracey equation for void growth seems to provide a
qualitative explanation for both the effects of inclu-
sion volume fraction and stress state on ductility for
axisymmetric specimens.
Hancock and MacKenzie noted that the failure
initiation event represented a transition between
homogeneous void growth and the formation of a
large central flaw due to the coalescence of several
voids. The general interpretation of these results by
the Glasgow school is that fracture occurs by shear
localization over some small volume containing a
certain number of large inclusions which becomes the
central crack that propagates to the extremity of the
specimen. Hancock and MacKenzie suggest that the
coalescence is due to shear localization between
adjacent voids and suggest further that the shear
localization, initiates at a critical void volume frac-
tion. The idea that fracture initiates when the void
volume fraction reaches a critical level is used in
many recent continuum studies of ductile fracture.
 Ductile fracture 1055

- EXPERIMENTAL
--- E’= a expt-3o n /2R

\/al 1 LTI
t
/

(a)
A
I
I
0 I
I I
2
i\
3
1
4
1
5
1
.6
1
7 8
1”
9 IO
EFFECTIVE PLASTIC STRAIN TO FAILURE INITIATION (&I

- EXPERIMENTAL
--- 5’; a exp(-30.,25)
Fig. 19. A drawing of an unnotched plane strain tensile
specimen, with dimensions defined by Corrigan et al. [151].
(Reprinted with permission of the American Welding
Society.)

shear localization will occur in volumes which con-

.4 -
(b)
0 ,I 2 3 4 S
EFFECTIVE PLASTIC STRAIN TO FAILURE INITIATION
- EXPERIMENTAL
---
(c)
0 I 2 3 4 5
EFFECTIVE PLASTIC STRAIN TO FAILURE INITIATION
Fig. 18. (a) The effective plastic strain to initiate failure, 4,
as a function of the stress state for Ql tested in the long
transverse and short transverse directions. (b) The effective
plastic strain required to initiate failure, E,, as a function of
the stress state for ESR tested in the long and short
transverse directions. (Note the lack of directionality in this
steel compared with those prepared by more conventional
techniques.) (c) The effective plastic strain required to ini-
tiate failure 4, as a function of the stress state for HY130
tested in the long and short transverse directions. (Note that
in the highly triaxial states, HY130S.T. fails at strains of the
order of 0.02; whereas in uniaxial tension, failure occurs
after a strain of the order of 0.65.) [126]. (Reprinted with
permission from J. Me&. Phys. Soli& 24, 147 (1976).
Pergamon Journals Ltd.)
Interpretations of Hancock and MacKenzie’s data
in later papers of the Glasgow group [144, 1451 tend
to reaffirm the importance of achieving a critical void
volume fraction, but there is an emphasis that the
event is localized, occurring on a size scale on the
order of the spacing between the large inclusions. An
important feature of these interpretations is that
tain locally higher volume fractions of inclusions.
Thus shear localization and fracture initiation are
6 7 .8 9 IO II 12 most likely to be associated with regions containing
(i, 1
a locally higher inclusion volume fraction. Because of
the higher inclusion volume fraction, they are the
first regions to achieve the void volume fractions
h’= D apt-so m/2e, required for shear localization.
Subsequent papers [144,145] by the Glasgow
group confirmed that for steels containing inclusions
weakly bound to the matrix, and heat-treated to a
bainitic or martensitic structure, the tensile fracture
strains for a given material could be fitted reasonably
well to a curve of the form 4 = a exp( - lSu,,#).
However, they noted that the tensile ductilities of
high strength aluminum alloys and of a steel contain-
6 7 .8 .9 IO II 12 ing 50% pearlite were much less sensitive to stress
( Ef I
triaxiality than were the tensile ductilities of mar-
tensitic and bainitic steels. We mention this only to
caution the reader that the dependence of tensile
ductility on stress state observed for the martensitic
and bainitic steels is by no means universal, and
appears to be associated with a particular fracture
mechanism.
Concurrent with the work of the Glasgow group
was an explosion of activity by the continuum
mechanics community, based on the work of Gurson
[119]. The important feature of Gurson’s work is that
the deforming body is no longer incompressible, but
dilatation of the body is permitted by void growth.
He developed constitutive relations for such a mate-
rial which permit yield criteria and flow rules for
porous (voided) materials. The Gurson model, with
some modifications, has been used in continuum
analyses of ductile fracture for smooth and notched
axisymmetric tensile specimens, plane strain tensile
specimens and in the highly localized region of
damage accumulation associated with fracture ini-
tiation at blunting crack tips.

PCS. 4,11-o
1056 W. M. GARRISONJR and
In applying the Gurson approach to ductile frac-
ture in tensile specimens, there have been essentially
two approaches. The first is to introduce an in-
homogeneity in the material by introducing a region
containing initially a higher void density than the rest
of the body. Then conditions leading to shear
localization within this region are determined. The
second approach is to assume an initially uniform
distribution of inclusions or voids and then deter-
mine the void volume fractions and strains as a
function of position within the body. Failure then
becomes a competition between the development of
a critical void volume fraction within some region
and strain localization.
Yamamoto [146] and Saje et al. [147] have deter-
mined conditions under which planar void in-
homogeneities, which extend through the body, lead
to shear localization. While they observe that planar
inhomogeneities can become regions of shear local-
ization in axisymmetric tensile specimens such behav-
ior is rarely observed. Using a criterion for failure
suggested by Tvergaard [148] that some volume
achieve a critical void volume fraction, Tvergaard
and Needleman [149, 1501 have shown that void
coalescence in the center of the neck will precede
macroscopic strain localization in axisymmetric ten-
sile specimens.
1II.C Plane strain tensiles
Plane strain tensile samples have no strain along
the width direction. Such specimens can utilize the
configuration shown in Fig. 19 or they can be
achieved using U notches of various dimensions. The
ratio of a,,,/~? for the specimen in Fig. 19 is 0.58, but
this ratio can be raised dramatically by using notched
plane strain tensile specimens, Our interest in plane
strain tensile specimens is twofold: (1) these samples
have been used in fundamental studies of the fracture
process, and (2) they have been used to provide a
measure of the critical fracture strain when modeling
fracture initiation ahead of initially sharp but blunt-
ing crack tips.
The specimen shown in Fig. 19 was essentially
developed by Corrigan et al. [151] to investigate the
biaxial strength of welds in heat-treated steel. The
plane strain stress state should result in a higher
ultimate tensile strength than that observed for
smooth axisymmetric tensile specimens. To ensure
that the elevation in ultimate tensile strength reached
the value expected from continuum analyses and was
independent of specimen thickness, Corrigan et al.
required that W > 30 t, B I 3 t and t I 0.6T, where
W, B, t, T are defined in Fig. 19. This specimen, in
various forms, has since been used for a number of
investigations: determination of the yield locus for
titanium alloy sheet [152], studies in which the plane
strain tensile ductility was used to provide a measure
of the fracture strain ahead of crack tips
[120, 153, 1541, and for studies of ductile fracture
[144, 1451. We note in passing that a variety of
N. R. MOODY
methods have apparently been used to measure
fracture strains with this test and not all are com-
pletely explained.
It appears that the plane strain, strain state is
susceptible to strain localization. Anand and Spitzig
[ 1551 observed, using an age-hardened martensitic
steel and a specimen similar to that shown in Fig. 19,
that slip bands formed at about 38” to the load axis
at strains about a fifth of the eventual fracture strain.
With increasing strain the number of slip bands
became more numerous, wavy, longer and more
pronounced (Fig. 20). The fracture path (Fig. 20)
was quite flat and was also about 38” + a few degrees
to the load axis. It is not known if fracture occurred
within the fine slip bands but it does appear that a
slant fracture is normally observed for specimens of
the type shown in Fig. 19.
Clausing [120] determined the strains to fracture
for a variety of materials using both plane strain
tensile specimens and smooth axisymmetric tensile
specimens. Comparison of his results, shown in
Table 3, show that the ductility was less for the plane
strain specimens than for the smooth axisymmetric
specimens. These data and the fact that the ratio of
plane strain and axisymmetric ductilities decreases
with increasing strength and presumably, therefore,
decreasing work hardening exponent, suggest that
strain state and work hardening capacity could be
important factors in determining ductility when the
mechanism of fracture is ductile. Needleman and
Rice [199] discuss the results of Clausing and, using
yield surfaces with vertices, suggest the ratio of
effective plane strain ductility to the ductility of
smooth axisymmetric specimens will scale as
I(3 n)/(l + 3 n)l”*, where n is the work hardening
exponent.
Numerical studies of the necking of plane strain
tensile specimens by McMeeking and Rice [1561 and
Burke and Nix [157], which employed the simplest
smooth yield surface theory of plasticity to character-
ize the material behavior, found only continued
growth of the diffuse neck with no tendency for the
formation of localized shearing (shear bands). How-
ever, other continuum analyses, adopting a variety of
assumptions as to material homogeneity and often
more complex yield surfaces, have shown that the
plane strain, strain state is unstable with respect to
the localization of plastic flow into shear bands.
These analyses include those of Yamamoto [146],
Saje et al. [147] and Ohno and Hutchinson [158]
which utilized the existence of material in-
homogeneities (i.e. regions of higher initial void
volume fraction). As summarized by Tvergaard et al.
[159], other work has shown that yield surface vertex
effects, departures from normality, and dilatational
plastic flow can all lead to localization of plastic flow
under conditions of plane strain.
A study by Hancock and Brown [125] of ductile
fracture used both unnotched and notched axisym-
metric tensile specimens and unnotched and notched
 Ductile fracture

Fig. 20. Plane strain tensile specimen of an aged maraging steel: specimen shown at a strain of 0.15 in
(a) and (b) and at the fracture strain of 0.17 in (c) and (d) [155]. (Reprinted with permission from J. Mech.
Phys. Solids 28, 113 (1980). Pergamon Journals Ltd.)

Table 2. Ductility and void growth in hydrogen charged plane strain tensile specimens. They used finite ele-
IN903 ment calculations to determine both the stress state
Calculated 6, (a,,&) and the strain at the position of fracture
4 initiation. When ~,,,/a at fracture is plotted as a
(meas.) RJR, q,,,/ci A B C function of effective strain at fracture, the data for
0 0.467 2.61 0.489 0.49 1.63 0.69 a particular steel tested in a given orientation fall in
770 0.192 1.63 0.376 0.25 0.98 0.42 a curve as shown in Fig. 21(a). This suggests that
1876 0.173 1.42 0.368 0.18 0.71 0.30
stress state and not the strain state is the important
2900 0.151 1.57 0.358 0.23 0.93 0.39
500 0.142 1.36 0.353 0.16 0.64 0.27 factor in determining the strain to fracture. indeed,
Hancock and Brown state:
A: McClintock: c,=

1.
“A recurrent theme of localization theories is the effect
J(3) 1 of strain state for quite a range of constitutive equations
WWR,) Imsinh&(l -n)+i
and physical mechanisms. However, the experimental
data of Figs 1518 do not bear this out as the data are
B: Rice and Tracey: c,= ln(R,/R,)O.283 exp(l.5 ~,,,/a). well correlated by the stress state parameter (a,/#) for
C: Marim et al.: L,= ln(R,/R,)/0.67 exp(l.5 u,,,/B) (using both axisymmetric and plane states of strain. The
a = 0.67 with volume fraction carbides = 0.003). ductility in plane strain tension is indeed less than that
1058 W. M. GARIUON JR and N. R. M~C~DY

Table 3. Comparison of smooth axisymmetric and plane strain tensile

ductilities
Yield strength Fracture strain
Steel (ksi) Axisymmetric Plane strain
ABS-C 39.1 1.04 0.75
A302-B 53.8 0.98 0.72
HY-80 85 1.22 0.86
HY-130(T) 136 1.06 0.52
18Ni(180) 178 1.00 0.42
IONi-Cr-MoCr 182 1.16 0.36
18Ni(250) 248 0.89 0.15

in axisymmetric tension as in Clausing’s (1970) work but
this is consistent with the reduction in ductility due to
the increase in triaxiality and its effect on hole growth
rate, the presence of holes being an essential feature of
all the materials examined in the flow field before failure
initiation.”
Needleman and Tvergaard took up this challenge
in their 1984 paper [150]. Considering voided ma-
terial, a modified Gurson theory and a fracture
criterion that the local void volume fraction exceed a
critical level, they investigated both notched axisym-
metric and notched plane strain tensile specimens of
geometries similar to those used by Hancock and
Brown. They were able to duplicate to some degree
the results of Hancock and Brown (Fig. 21b). They
concluded that “as long as deviations from constant
triaxiality history are not too great, the onset of
failure, when represented in a plot of stress triaxiality
vs effective strain is approximately represented by a
single curve. However, significant deviations from
this behavior can occur for nonproportional histor-
ies, with plastic flow localization playing an im-
portant role in this regard. . . . We find that in plane
strain bluntly notched specimens, the non-
proportional loading arising from shear localization
does lead to significantly earlier fracture strains.” Our
conclusion, after reviewing experimental and con-
tinuum studies of plane strain behavior, is that the
plane strain tensile specimens of the type shown in
Fig. 19 are prone to shear localization. In fact,
specimens of this type fail by a nominally flat fracture
at angle N 35-45” to the load direction even for steels
having yield strengths as low as 250 MPa (36 ksi)
[160].
While smooth and notched axisymmetric tensile
specimens fail by the formation of an interval cavity
which propagates to the surface, plane strain tensile
specimens of the type shown in Fig. 19 tend to fail
first at the surface. These surface initiated cracks
propagate towards the center of the specimen. The
apparent signature of this shear localization and
shear fracture is a fracture surface consisting of fine,
closely spaced, submicron dimples whose widths are
much larger than their depths. The last region to

---I $i~W.lETRIC DEFORMATION

_ FIA~o~~TRAIN DEFORMATION

- FAILURE LOCUS
STRESS STATE RANGE IN
? 7 DEFORMATION HISTORY

Fig. 21. (a) Failure locus for axisymmetric and plane strain tensile specimens reported by Hancock and
Brown for the steel 50D tested in the longitudinal transverse orientation [125]. (Reprinted with permission
from J. Mech. Phys. Solids 31, 1 (1983). Pergamon Journals Ltd.) (b) Failure locus found by Needleman
and Tvergaard assuming failure occurs when the void volume fraction (f) reaches a critical value (f,).
This is for a material in which voids nucleate at strain of 0.3 [150]. (Reprinted with permission from
J. Mech. Phys. Solids 32, 461 (1984). Pergamon Journals Ltd.)
 Ductile fracture 1059

Fig. 22. The fracture surface of a plane strain tensile specimen of an ultra-high strength steel (a). The
fracture surfaces at the edge (b) and the center (c) are compared at higher magnification (199).

0.40 -
fracture, the center, exhibits a fracture surface consis-
n HP9-4-20+Ti,Al640AO ting of larger dimples (Fig. 22). As shown in Fig. 23,
: - 0 HP9-4-20 640AO
?
the area of the fine dimpled region decreases as the
8 HP9-4-20 640-565
plane strain ductility increases. For those more inter-
2
E 0.30 -
ested in the micromechanisms of fracture of these
specimens, reports by Hahn et al. [161] and by
5
Clausing [ 1621 are useful.
$ Before ending this section, we would like to men-
2 0.20
tion two papers which provide information as to the
?
effect of inclusion volume fraction on plane strain
Z
0 tensile ductility. Speich and Spitzig investigated the
L : -\\--
0.10 influence of inclusion volume fraction on the smooth
2 axisymmetric and plane strain tensile ductilities for
;3 4340 steel tempered to several strength levels [ 1301. As
% shown in Fig. 24, neither measure of ductility is
I I I I markedly influenced by inclusion volume fraction at
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 040
the highest strength level. A dependence on volume
EFFECTIVE PLANE STRAIN DUCTILITY fraction appears only as the strength is reduced.
Fig. 23. A plot of the area of fine dimples as a function of Spitzig subsequently investigated the influence of
plane strain ductility for three ultra-high strength steels. inclusion volume fraction and specimen orientation
1060
(a) I2
r \.
0 ESR (O.O02%S)
0 u~0.003-0.022%.51
A RE 10.003-0.0248s.
RARE- EARTH 1
9x) MPo (135 ksi)
1410 MPo (205 kai)
‘;i%%i-,
1960MPo
0’ 0.04 0.08
VOLUME PERCENT INCLUSIONS
Fig. 24. (a) Axisymmetric and (b) plane strain tensile ductilities plotted as a function of inclusion volume
fraction for 4340 steel tempered to the indicated strength levels [130].
on the smooth axisymmetric and plane strain tensile
ductilitiesfor a low strength (250 MPa yield strength)
steel [1601. Figure 25 shows that by using an inclusion
projected area per unit volume or a mean local
inclusion area fraction both the transverse and short
transverse properties can be placed on the same
curve.
1II.D Fracture initiation toughness
The plane strain fracture initiation toughness, K,=,
is important because it is regarded as a material
property and can be used to predict when fracture
will occur when a material contains a flaw of a given
size (a) and is subjected to known nominal stresses
(a). Fracture will occur when K,c = K(a, a), where K
is the stress intensity factor for a given part or
specimen containing a crack.
Measurements of K,c are made using specimens
containing very sharp fatigue pre-cracks [163, 1641.
In addition, there are constraints on specimen dimen-
sions and the crack length. These limitations make
it often difficult to obtain or test specimens of the size
required to obtain valid K,= values for materials of
high toughness. This can be overcome by introducing
the J-integral approach [164-1661 in which fracture
initiation occurs when the J integral achieves a
critical value, Jlc. As long as the J,c test is done
under conditions of small-scale yielding, one can use
JIGto calculate the fracture toughness (K,c) one
would obtain if sufficiently large samples had been
tested. These quantities are related by [167]
Jlc = !$ (1 - v*) (plane strain).
W. M. GARRISONJR and N. R. MOODY
1
0
0
ESR (0002XS)
U (0.003-0.022968)
r0 RE (0.003-0.024%5,
RARE- EARTH 1
1210 MPo (175 ksi)
14lOMPo(205kri)
0
A * 0
0 ” / n
(265ksi) 1960 hiPo (265 ksi)
I I 1
U.IZ 0.04 0.08 0.12
VOLUME PERCENT INCLUSIONS
If one begins to deform a specimen containing a
sharp crack, linear elastic analysis predicts there will
be an infinite stress at the crack tip. However, the
stress at the crack tip does not go to infinity because
plastic deformation occurs, resulting in finite stresses
at the crack tip. The plastic deformation at the crack
tip also has the effect of blunting the crack tip, as
shown in Fig. 26. As we will see crack tip blunting
is critical to our understanding fracture initiation
toughness. The blunting process can be quantified by
the crack tip opening displacement, 6, shown in Fig.
26. The crack tip opening displacement can also be
used as a measure of fracture initiation toughness. In
this approach, fracture will initiate when crack tip
blunting stops and 6 reaches a critical value (~5,~).
6,c, K, and J,= are related by
J,c = K,,-( 1 - v *)/E (plane strain),
where a,, is the flow stress and d, is a function of the
ratio a,/E and the work hardening exponent n. It
should be noted that blunting does not necessarily
result in the semicircular crack tip shown in Fig. 26.
Unique solutions for blunting behavior are not
possible and the blunting profiles shown in Fig. 27
are among those suggested [168] and observed. The
shape of the blunting crack tip is important because
the strain distribution and rate of void growth ahead
of the crack tip apparently change as the shape is
changed.
The levels of stress, strain and the stress state
(triaxiality) are important factors if fracture ini-
 Ductile fracture 1061

tiation occurs by ductile processes. The plastic strain (4

1.6
and the stress in the plane ahead of the crack are
0 . (0.004% Sl
plotted as a function of X,/6 in Fig. 28, where X0 is
0 . (0.021% Sl
the distance from the initially sharp crack tip. These A 4 ~O.O26%SI
0 0 A Transverse specimens
results were first derived by Rice and Johnson [169]. l . A Through-thickness specimens
Large scale deformation (blunting) at the crack tip

(4
1.5 -

1.4 -

1.3 -

1.2 -

1.1 - 02 -

1.0 - -I
.c_
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
0
I_ 09 - Local area fraction (%I
‘,
F 0.6 -
Fig. 25. The transverse and through thickness tensile duc-
tilities of a mild steel containing three sulfur levels plotted
z:: 0.7-
as a function of (a) inclusion volume fraction; (b) inclusion
; projected area per unit volume, A,, on a plane perpendic-
0.6 -
ular to the tensile axis; and (c) mean local area fraction of
sulfide inclusions on a plane perpendicular to the tensile axis
05-
[160]. (Reprinted with permission from Acta Metall. 33, 175
0.4 -
(1985). Pergamon Journals Ltd.)

0.3 -

0 . LO.004 96 S)
results in large plastic strains ahead of the crack tip.
0.2 - II n (0.021% S) The strain decreases to a low value at a distance of
A A (0.0269. 91
0 0 A Tronrverse
about 2 6. The stress increases with X,/6 until X,, is
0.1 -
l ’ h Through--thickness about 2 6; the stress remains high until the end of the
I I I I I I I I I plastic zone and then decreases. The plastic zone
0 0.02 0.040.060.06 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18

Volume fraction of inclusions (%)

6 IC

.6 , , , , , , , , , , ,

14_

1.2 -

CRACK TIP
1.0 -
.G BLUNTS
e
z

8
2 o.e-
1
t
F
LJ_ 06-

0.4

0.2

0
_

-
.

0.4
0.
q .
A.
o q A Transverse
. A

0.6
(0.026
(0.021
(0.004

Through-

1.2 1.6
% S)
% S)
% S)

thickness

2.02.4 2.6 3.2 3.64.04.4 4.6

3 IC
ECTURE
IC

Fig. 26. A schematic diagram of the blunting process ahead

of an initially sharp crack. Fracture will occur when S
LI, (mm-‘) reaches a crItIca value a,=.
1062 JR and N. R. MWXIY
W. M. GARRISON

(4 +
SMOOTHLY 6-
BLUNTING
.N=.2

N=.I

b _)I 1 J
FLAT-NOSED
OR SQUARELY
BLUNTING
--- co/E = .0050
N=O

- - co/E = .0075
- ALL CASES, N =0
0 I I I 0 I
SHARP NOSE 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
BLUNTING x/ 8,

INITIAL BLUNTED CRACK

Fig. 27. Possible modes of nonsmooth crack blunting sug- SHARP CRACK
gested by McMeeking [168]. (Reprinted with permission
from J. eng. Mars. Tech. The American Society of Mechan-
ical Engineers, 345 East 47 Street, NY 10017 (1977).)

extends much further than 2 6. For a non hardening c:’ 1.0

material, the ratio (a,,/~,,) is equal to the ratio of a,,,/~? FULLY PLASTIC
plus l/,/3. Thus there are not only large gradients in SMALL SCALE YIELDING
0.5
both stress and plastic strain but in the stress state
ahead of the crack tip as shown in Fig. 29. All
modeling which hopes to relate 6,c, K,c or J,c to
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
mechanical properties which can be directly meas-
ured or to parameters which quantify microstructure X/6+

must account for the very steep gradients, especially
the gradient in strain. Such models are numerous,
and those by Krafft [170], Hahn and Rosenfield
[171], Rice and Johnson [169] and the so-called
characteristic distance model will be discussed.
When Krafft [170] developed his model, only the
elastic stress distribution ahead of a sharp crack was
available. From this he argued that the strain should
decay rapidly ahead of the crack tip. In his approach,
he assumed fracture initiation would occur when a
tensile instability was reached ahead of the crack tip.
Fig. 28. The stress in the vertical direction (u,,) normalized
by the yield strength (uO)and the strain ahead of a smoothly
blunting notch in the plane of the crack as a function of X/6
where X is the distance from the initial crack tip and 6 is the
crack tip opening displacement [168, 1691.
The strain at which the tensile instability occurred
was taken equal to the work hardening exponent n
and the position of the instability was taken as dT.
The region between the crack tip and dT was termed
the process zone. Krafft calculated d, by requiring

Fig. 29. The equivalent plastic strain and level of triaxiality (~,,,/a) as a function of X/6 [180].
 Ductile fracture 1063

t----XC------l
--I &2Ro
> h
”

-n_ VOID SITE ENVELOPED BY

LARGE STRAIN REGION

FURTHER GROWTH,
LOCALIZED FLOW BEGINS

FINAL COALESCENCE

SIC”X,

Fig. 30. Fracture initiation as postulated by Rice and Johnson. An inclusion or pre-existing void of radius
&is positioned a distance X0 ahead of the crack tip. As the inclusion is enveloped by the strain field ahead
of the blunting crack the void grows. Fracture is taken to occur when the ligament between the blunted
crack tip equals the vertical void radius [169].

agreement between measured values of K, and his
model. He observed that dr could be much larger
than the spacing of void nucleating particles, thus he
did not suggest dT would be the same as inclusion
spacing.
Hahn and Rosenfield, in a 1968 paper, before the
work of Rice and Johnson, assumed a linear strain
distribution in the plastic zone [ 1711. This approach
predicts
K, = (2Ea,$ 1)“2,
where a,, is the yield strength, 1 is the size of the
plastic zone and ZF is the strain at the crack tip at
initiation of fracture. They assumed E/’ could be
taken as one-third the tensile strain as measured
from smooth axisymmetric tensile specimens. They
also found that I, determined by requiring agreement
with theory and measured K,c could be expressed as
a function of n:
This model for fracture initiation toughness requires
some critical fracture strain and some measure of
distance. It suggests, as did the model of Krafft, that
K,c should increase with n, the work hardening
exponent.
In 1972 Rice and Johnson [169] made the first
explicit connection between 6,c and microstructure.
Moreover, they obtained their results in context of
the continuum equations for void growth [92,93].
They considered a pre-existing void, or particle
weakly bound to the matrix, of radius &,, a distance
X0 ahead of an initially sharp crack, as shown in Fig.
30. They calculated numerically the void size as the
crack tip blunted. They then assumed fracture to
occur when the ligament between the blunted crack
tip and the void equalled the vertical void radius.
Their numerical results are shown in Fig. 31, where
6,c/X,, is plotted as function of X,/Z&. This allows 6,c
to be written as

I = 25.4 x 10-+z2 + 0.0005)(m).

where F is a weakly varying function of (X0/&). In
Thus their semi-empirical expression for K,c is writ- applying their model they suggested regarding X0 as
ten as the average 3D nearest neighbor distance between
inclusions; thus X0 = 0.89&,f-“3, where &, is the
._ = 512Eu..Pf(n2+0.0005)
K,,- _ ,,. x 10-31”2(MNm -3’2). average inclusion radius and f is the inclusion volume
1064 W. M. GARRISON JR and N. R. MOODY

t 8,/X, AT FRACTURE 3 I I 1 I ’
smallscaleyleldlng
thcoretlcal
C”T”C,

alloy steel castings

6500C. I
effect of
tcmpumg
En25 -
550VA

I 1 I
Xo’Ro high-strength weldmctok
t”;:$: ,
0 I 1 1 I,
IO 20 30
0 100 150 200
NON METAL:: INCLUSION SPACING/INCLUSION RADIUS
Fig. 31. The quantity 6,c/X,, as determined plotted as a
function X0/R, by Rice and Johnson [169]. *,k

Fig. 33. Critical crack tip opening displacement divided by

inclusion spacing X,, plotted as a function of X,/E0 for
fraction. Therefore F(X,/&) in their numerical re- several steels and the theoretical curves of Rice and Johnson
sults would be F(f-I/‘). Hahn et al. [25] used the [194]. (Reprinted with permission from Micromechanirms
of Fibrous Crack Extension in Engineering Alloys. Metal
results of Rice and Johnson to show that one would Science (1980).)
expect K,C to scale as

As Fig. 33 shows, the Rice and Johnson model is

Plotting ln[K,c/,/(u,E)] as a function of In(f) for
several steels and aluminum alloys, they found that
K,C did scale as f-‘/6 for materials of the same value
of a,/E (Fig. 32). They noted that this equation
predicts that the fracture toughness will increase with
increasing yield strength which must be incorrect, as
toughness normally decreases with increasing
strength. Hahn et al. suggested that could be because
at “higher strength levels, the attendant lower rates
of work hardening favor strain localization and pro-
mote plastic instability within the ‘intensely strained
region’, thereby promoting the coalescence of voids”
1251.
not obeyed by most systems, partly because it as-
sumes a specific failure criteria which is independent
of strength level and fine-scale microstructure.
The plot by Hahn et al. [25] of the data of Birkle
et al. [172] suggests the Rice and Johnson approach
is correct but incomplete (Fig. 34). These data show
that for a given tempering treatment 6,c does scale
with X,,, but the rate of increase of 6,c with 1,
increases as the yield strength is decreased by tem-
pering. What this graph does suggest is that for steels
of otherwise identical microstructures the 6,c will
scale as X,,. There is a large body of data by Knott
and others which reinforce this conclusion
[27, 172-1771.

uy /E x IO-’
L

13 4340 steel
~2OOM(l8N1)steel
Kf04SC-NI-Cr-MO sfeel 0045 C-NI-Cr-MO steel
0 300 M steel U 2014-T6 aluminum
n 2024-T8Sl aluminum

011 I I I L I I I 1 I

001 01 IO IO
f, , percent

Fig. 32. Intluence of inclusion volume fraction on the fracture toughness of ultra-high strength steels of
comparable yield strengths [25]. (Reproduced with permission from the Annual Reuiew of Maferials
Science, Vol. 2. 0 1972 by Annual Reviews Inc.)
 Ductile fracture
Tempering Yield Stress
Temp. (“C) (Mn/m’)
1 205 1610-1635 / A
\ 315 I585
I 370 1505-1540
1 425 1455-1500
L 480 1380-1395
0
Sulphide Spacing,pm
Fig. 34. The critical crack tip opening displacement as a
function of inclusion spacing in a Ni-Cr-Mo steel. (Data
from [172] as plotted in [25].)
The Rice and Johnson model has been criticized
because it predicts the fracture toughness increases
with inclusion size. This results because an increase in
inclusion size at fixed volume fraction increases X0,
and hence 6,c if the fine-scale microstructure is not
changed. The data of Cox and Low [9] do not support
the notion that 6,c will increase with X0. However, it
is possible that, in the case of the maraging steel this
was because reducing the size of the Ti(C,N) particles
made them more resistant to fracture and that reduc-
ing sulfur content in 4340 reduced not only the
average inclusion size but the tendency to form
stringers. As the toughness specimens used by Cox
and Low were oriented with the crack direction
parallel to the rolling direction, a large improvement
in toughness would be possible simply by removing
the stringers. Two studies [176,199] have shown that
increasing X0 by increasing the average inclusion size
at a fixed inclusion volume fraction does increase
toughness.
A generalization of the above three approaches to
modeling fracture initiation toughness is the modified
strain criterion approach or characteristic distance
model [127, 178-1831. In this approach the equivalent
plastic strain (5) must exceed a critical strain (CT )
over some characteristic distance Z$ as shown sche-
matically in Fig. 35. This approach implies
In applying this model, Z/* has been taken as the plane
strain tensile ductility or it has been obtained using
tensile specimens of varying notch acuity. In using the
1065
5=x&C ot fracture
Fig. 35. Schematic diagram of the critical strain controlled
or characteristic distance model for microvoid coalescence.
The equivalent plastic strain, 5, has been plotted as a
function of X/6, where X is the distance from the initial
crack tip and 6 is the crack tip opening displacement. l/’ is
the critical strain and 1: the characteristic fracture distance
[196].
notched tensile specimens, the plastic strain ahead of
the crack tip is plotted as function of triaxiality (i.e.
eliminating S/X in Fig. 29); on this same graph the
fracture strains of the notched tensile specimens are
plotted as a function of stress state. The intersection
of these curves determines the actual fracture strain
which then determines I,*. Lee et al. in their studies
of ultra high strength steels took lo+ to be a fixed
multiple of a particle spacing and found good agree-
ment with calculated and experimental 6,c using for
E,* the effective plane strain tensile ductility [153].
Ritchie et al. in their study of low strength pressure
vessel steels used the approach outlined above for
notched tensile specimens to determine c/* and found
1: was a multiple, a, of X0, the inclusion spacing, but
that a was dependent on the material [180].
The conceptual success of this model has led to
a general conviction that any model for fracture
initiation toughness must incorporate some charac-
teristic distance and some measure of ductility. How-
ever, there are numerous drawbacks to this model.
First, it is difficult to interpret on a microstructural
basis; in fact as it is presently constituted the model
is unable to predict how 6,c will scale with particle
spacing. Second, it does not incorporate the micro-
mechanisms of the fracture process. Third, there are
difficulties with using tensile specimens to estimate a
critical fracture strain: (1) a tensile specimen does not
incorporate the very sharp strain gradient ahead of
the crack tip, and as a result widely spaced micro-
structural features could influence tensile ductility but
have little effect on 6,c; (2) neither plane strain nor
notched tensile specimens reflect the changing stress
state experienced by a particular point ahead of the
blunting crack tip.
In an effort to maintain the importance of inclusion
spacing in the fracture initiation process suggested by
1066 W. M. GARRS~NJR and N. R.
Rice and Johnson’s model, Garrison proposed an
approach to initiation toughness for a material con-
taining a unimodal dispersion of spherical particles
weakly bound to the matrix [184]. These are termed
the primary particles. Such particles can be regarded
as pre-existing voids which will grow when the par-
ticles enter the highly localized strain field ahead of
an initially sharp crack [169]. It is possible that void
sheet coalescence [6,9] might result in the coalescence
of the voids nucleated at the primary particles and
their linking to the crack tip prior to their linking by
a necking down of the ligament between them. Sup-
pose the system contains, in addition to the primary
particles, a dispersion of particles strongly bound to
the matrix (secondary particles). By the process of
void sheet coalescence, the growing voids nucleated
at the primary particles would link up via the voids
nucleated at the secondary particles. Therefore in this
model system one would expect the toughness to
depend on the extent of growth of the voids nucleated
at the primary particles and probably on the spacing
of these particles as suggested by both the Rice and
Johnson model [169] for ductile fracture and some
interpretations of experimental studies of ductile frac-
ture [172-1771. This approach is consistent with
McMeeking’s discussion of the Rice and Johnson
model [185].
McMeeking’s numerical calculations of void
growth provide a basis for introducing void growth
into a model of ductile fracture. Using the Rice and
Tracey model for void growth [92], McMeeking
obtained a graphical relationship between void size
and S/X, [168, 1851, where 6 is the crack tip opening
displacement and X0 is the distance of a primary
particle of radius RI from the initial crack tip. His
results (Fig. 36) indicate that for a smoothly blunting
crack tip, the average of R,/R,and Rx/R,, where R,
and R, are regarded as the maximum and minimum
radii of the void in the plane of fracture, should be
approximately linear in 6/X,. In what follows, the
average of R, and Rx will be called R,, the void
radius; this is reasonable for most ductile fractures in
which microvoids are reasonably equiaxed. Follow-
ing Rice and Johnson [169] and identifying X0 as the
average 3D nearest neighbor distance between pri-
mary particles, one would expect the critical crack tip
opening displacement to scale as
6,c - &@,I&).
This approach predicts the same dependence on X0,
the primary particle spacing, as the Rice and Johnson
model, but (RJR,) introduces a measure of ductility
lacking in that model.
This model has been tested using several ultra high
strength steels [176, 177, 184, 186, 187 for which the
primary particles are spherical sulfides. The average
3D nearest neighbor distance between sulfides, X0,
has been calculated from
MOODY
UNDEFORMED CONFIG. DEFORMED CONFIG.
2
._
o4 -
<
a* 3-
Fig. 36. McMeeking’s calculations of R,/& and Rx/& as
a function of S/X,, where 6 is the crack tip opening
displacement and X0is the position of a void of initial radius
&. McMeeking’s R, is R, in our terminology. R, should be
given approximately by the average of R, and Rx,where R,
is the average of R, and R, [168].
wherefis sulfide volume fraction and &, the average
sulfide radius. The sulfide size distribution and
(RY/R,)are plotted as a function of R, in Fig. 37 for
one of the steels studied. The value of RJR,
evaluated at & [(R,/&)(,Jhas been used to charac-
terize the extent of void growth. ~5,~is plotted as a
function of [&(R,/R,)1,J in Fig. 38 for several steels
and the results are consistent with the proposed
scaling. It should be noted that this approach is
similar to that proposed by Bates [ 1791 and almost
identical to that of Thompson [200].
In addition, it appears this approach can, in some
situations, be used to assess the effects of two particle
distributions on initiation toughness. Two particle
distributions, a narrow size distribution of small
chloride inclusions and a broad size distribution of
large pores, are common in blended elemental, pow-
der processed titanium alloys. Three billets of powder
processed Ti lOV-2Fe3Al were studied to determine
the effect of these two types of defects on fracture
toughness [188]. One billet had both pores and inclu-
sions, a second billet was hot isostatically pressed to
leave just the inclusions, and a third billet, produced
from very low chloride powder, had just pores. The
effect of each type of defect on toughness was pro-
nounced as shown in Table 4, where 6,= increased
from 5 pm in the billet with pores and inclusions to
25 pm in the billet with just pores.
The role of each type of defect on a,, was examined
through the effect of particle spacing and void growth
 Ductile fracture 1067

at failure with the following relation between 6,c, the

average particle spacing X,,, and the amount of void
growth (R”/R,).

where R, is void radius at fracture and R, is the initial

void radius.? The amount of void growth to final
failure corresponding to the average inclusion, aver-
age pore and average combined inclusion and pore
sizes was determined from fracture surface mea-
surements. The average particle sizes and 3D spacings
1
!;
INCLUSION RADIUS. /tm
were determined by computer-controlled SEM digital
analysis of metallographically prepared samples.
The effect of particle spacing and corresponding
void growth at failure on 6,c is shown in Fig. 39. The
data in Table 4 and Fig. 39 indicate that both
parameters influence 6,c in these samples. It is also
apparent that in single particle distribution samples
those particles control 6,c. It is not directly apparent
from the data for the billet containing both pores and
inclusions if inclusions, pores, or a combination of
both defects control ~5,~.However, examination of
the fracture surface shows void growth occurs around
each type of particle and suggests that both inclusions
and pores control fracture toughness of samples -6 02 04 0.; 0.8 i 12 la lb 1.; 2 i
containing both types of defects. INCLUSION RADIUS, pm
However, this approach has definite limitations. As
shown by the data in Fig. 38, all of the materials Fig. 37. The size distribution of manganese sulfides found
examined to that point obeyed the scaling on the fracture surface of a K,= specimen and the ratio of
6K - XoUW&)l,. On investigating the fracture void to manganese sulfide size plotted as a function of
sulfide size. The extent of void growth associated with a
particular sulfide of radius R, is RJR,. The void radius, R,,
t Note that here the proposed scaling is 6,c- X0 is taken to be one-half the average or the maximum and
ln(R,/R,) rather than 6,c - &(R,/R,). minimum void diameters [176].

60- *
AFl410
1200v (AGED so-3 -
0
50-

40-
6
$r% 1050~C
30- 0

OAF 1410 (AGED 425-C)

20- l
S4OOC o BASE + Ni + Si

0
BASE+ Ni.
IO- BASE + Ni + Si +MoV
BASE *
BASE + Si
1 I I I
OO 25 50 75 100
X,(R,/R,)Ia, &ml

Fig. 38. The critical crack tip opening displacement, a,,-, plotted as a function of XO(RY/R,)Jh, where
X0 is the sulfide spacing and (RJR,) 1R.is the ratio of void to sulfide size evaluated at R.. The dark circles
(a) refer to steels of yield strength greater than 1500 MN/mZ. The open circles (0) refer to HP9-4-20
in the as-quenched condition for three different austenitizing temperatures [176,177,184,186,187].
1068 W. M. GARRISONJR and N. R. MCKIDY

Table 4. Powder processed blended elemental Ti-IOV-2Fe-3Al material properties

Yield
strength KK
Condition (MN rne2) 4 (MN m-3’*)
As-sintered
(pores and inclusions 883 0.021 29.1 5
Hot isostatically pressed
(inclusions only 928 0.24 48.3 12.6
As-sintered
(pores only) 786 0.058 62.9 25

Modeling data
Pores + inclusions Pores only Inclusions only

X0
Condition Olm) (&/&)I, 2) (&/&)I, 2) (&I&) Ifi
As-sintered
(pores and inclusions) 2.66 2.51 31 1.21 6.78 3.22
Hot isostatically pressed
(inclusions only) - - 6 3.61
As-sintered
(pores only) - - 31 1.99 -

I
30
I
In generalizing the approach at least two factors
8=X01n(R,IR,1
should be considered. First, the approach presently
assumes that the rate of void growth with respect to
/ 6 is a constant. It is possible this is not the case. For
20 I /’ example, it may be that the rate of void growth
changes when the blunting behavior changes. In the
as-quenched condition when n = 0.18, the profile of
2
IO
/
i’ .
0 PORES

INCLUSIONS
the blunted crack is smooth. When the HP9-4-20 is
tempered at 565”C, n = 0.08 and the crack tip profile
is square. It is possible the rate of void growth ahead
/ 0 PORES AN0 INCLUSIONS
o/ of a smoothly blunting crack tip is greater than the
/ rates of void growth around a crack tip blunting
! I I
OO IO 20 30 40 to a square profile. Second, it is possible that in
X,ln(R,/R,), pm materials of high ductility the voids which coalesce
with the crack tip are not particle nucleated voids, but
Fig. 39. A plot of 6,c as a function of X,ln(R,/R,) for the are super-voids resulting from the coalescence of a
three powder processed blended elemental titanium alloys
described in Table 4 [188]. number of particle nucleated voids.
The foregoing models all address fracture initiation
toughness in terms of a critical distance (which may
properties of a second heat of HP9-4-20 steel it was be in some systems linearly related to a particle
found that in the as-quenched condition its behavior spacing) and some measure of ductility. However,
was consistent with previous data. However, on none of these models describe with any completeness
tempering this heat at 200°C and 565°C S,c increases the fracture process. Fracture initiation can appar-
substantially but there is no increase in (R,/R,)I%, as ently occur via several processes, three of which are
shown in Table 5. Thus, there may be limits in using shown in Fig. 40. First is the internal necking used in
(RY/R,)lRO as a measure of the critical fracture the Rice and Johnson model [169]. This has been
strain; on the other hand, it is possible the approach observed by Ritchie et al. in studies of a low carbon
needs only to be modified. ferritic machining steel [193]. Aravas and McMeeking

Table 5. Mechanical properties and inclusion and void growth data for HP9-4-20
as a function of tempering
Tempering Flow Work
temperatures stress hardening 6,c
(“C) (MN me2) exponent b m) (R,IR,)l,
As-quenched 1398 0.18 15.5 2.50 10.3
200 1394 0.10 41.5 2.50 9.3
565 1313 0.08 91.1 2.50 10.1
 Ductile fracture
a a function of 6/X, for work hardening exponents of
Fig. 40. Idealizations of three possible fracture modes
during fracture initiation: (a) internal necking, (b) lccal-
ization of shear along slip line spiral and (c) localization
of shear between crack tip and void not directly ahead of
crack tip [194]. (Reprinted with permission from Micro-
mechanisms of Fibrous Crack Extension in Engineering
Alloys. Metal Science (1980))
in their numerical analyses have apparently achieved
this process of internal necking [189]. Second, it has
been observed that initiation can occur by the for-
mation of a “narrow” shear crack forming at the
blunted crack tip. This shear crack follows curved
paths corresponding to the slip lines around a circular
notch. These shear cracks link up with a growing void
located somewhere along the slipline curve. This has
been observed in both aluminum alloys, quenched
and tempered steels and prestrained mild steels [ 1941.
In addition, it is possible that fracture can occur by
strain localization between the crack tip and a void
growing above or below the plane of the crack. Such
fractures would produce a zig-zag fracture. Such
fractures have been predicted by the continuum
calculations of Needleman and Tvergaard [195] in
which they considered an array of large inclusions
and an additional array of smaller more closely
spaced particles strongly bonded to the matrix. In this
case the strain localization was induced solely by the
formation of voids at the small particles. These
observations, and experimental results discussed
earlier, indicate that void nucleation, growth and
coalescence, particle spacing and shear localization
are involved in the fracture process during fracture
initiation. However, the relative importance of
these various factors and the extent to which they
are inter-related are not known. Of these factors
void growth and particle spacing have received the
greatest attention.
It is clear from the continuum descriptions of void
growth that the high triaxiality at the crack tip will
result in rapid void growth as the particle is en-
veloped into regions of high strain close to the crack
1069
tip. McMeeking [185] considered the same geometry
as Rice and Johnson and computed void growth as
n-0 and n = 0.10 at positions directly in front of the
crack tip and at 45” to the crack tip. He found the
extent of void growth was not greatly influenced by
a modest degree of work hardening nor did the
angular position of the particle significantly influence
the extent of void growth for a given S/X,. Aravas
and McMeeking [ 1891later showed, examining cylin-
drical voids rather than spherical voids, that there is
a pronounced interaction between voids and the
blunted crack tip. They compared these results to
those obtained by using McClintock’s [86] equations
for growth of cylindrical voids and found that the
strong crack tipvoid interaction provided for in their
calculations result in void growth rates 6 times faster.
It is reasonable to expect that incorporating void-
crack tip interactions will also result in much faster
growth rates than McMeeking found for spherical
voids [185]. In addition, Aravas and McMeeking
[ 1891found, on providing for the interaction between
the crack tip and the growing void, that the rate of
void growth decreased substantially with an increase
in work hardening capacity. Thus, on the basis of
void growth, high toughness should be favored by
high work hardening capacity.
While void growth has been the subject of several
continuum investigations, there have been no experi-
mental tests of their results. In addition, two aspects
of void growth have received little or no theoretical
or experimental attention; these are the influence of
crack tip blunting geometry on void growth and the
formation and subsequent growth of super-voids,
voids formed by the coalescence of several particle
nucleated voids.
In obtaining the strains just ahead of a blunting
crack, Rice and Johnson [169] assumed a smoothly
blunted crack tip. Such profiles are often observed,
and are normally assumed in modeling crack tip
behavior as in void growth calculations of void
growth by McMeeking [168,185] and Aravas and
McMeeking [189]. However, non-smoothly blunted
crack tip profiles have been observed. McMeeking
[ 1681considered two cases of non-smoothly blunting
notches, shown in Fig. 27. He calculated both the
strains ahead of such crack tips and the rates of void
growth directly ahead of the crack tip. As shown in
Fig. 41, changes in crack tip blunting behavior
greatly alter the strain and void growth rate just
ahead of the crack tip. The rate of void growth goes
to zero directly ahead of the non-smoothly blunting
cracks. It appears that low work hardening [190] and
low plastic constraint (triaxiality) [191] will favor
non-smooth blunting. Moreover, it is not known if
blunting behavior changes as 6 increases [192]. That
the rate of void growth directly ahead of non-
smoothly blunting crack tips may go to zero could
have important implications in modeling fracture
initiation. What is needed are calculations to deter-
1070 W. M. GARRISON JR and N. R. MOODY

- SMOOTHLY BLUNTED

I
tr ------ FLAT NOSED CASE
SMOOTHLY BLUNTED RY%
EY __---_ --- SHARP NOSED CASE
2.0 FLAT NOSED CASE Rx/R, 6
--_ SHARP NOSED CASE RY
1 ---- ----R
I Y
5
/ /

4-

3-

OO 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 25 I 0.2

’ 0.6
I I IOI , 14
1 , 16
I I

x18, 81%7

Fig. 41, A comparison of the strains and the extents of void growth ahead of a blunting crack for the
three indicated blunting geometries [168].

mine whether the rate of void growth above and
below the plane of the non-smoothly blunting cracks
are smaller or greater than the rate of void growth
directly ahead of a smoothly blunting crack.
While the importance of particle spacing has been
established for certain systems (primarily ultra high
strength steels) this important clue to the nature of
the fracture process has yet to be exploited in alloy
design or to be examined in detail. In terms of alloy
design it is clear that substantial improvements in
toughness can be realized, even at constant inclusion
volume fraction, by maximizing the inclusion spacing
by making the inclusions as large as possible. For
example, the toughness of the steel AF1410 aged at
510°C can be increased from 28 to 66pm by in-
creasing the inclusion spacing from 2.3 to 7.6 pm by
increasing the average inclusion radius from 0.18 to
0.64pm [199]. If the radius and spacing could be
increased to 1.92 and 23 pm respectively, 6,c should
increase to almost 200 pm. While the Rice and John-
son calculations and the results of Birkle et al. suggest
6,: will scale as X0 as long as the fine-scale micro-
structure is constant, there is really no fundamental
understanding of why 6,c (at least over some range)
should be linear in X,.
1II.E Mechanical properties: summary
Fracture of smooth and notched axisymmetric
tensile specimens begins by the coalescence of several
voids in the center of the specimen. Fracture then
occurs by the propagation of this central crack. At
this point it is impossible to predict tensile ductilities.
However, in the absence of nucleation strains, the
continuum expressions for void growth provide a
qualitative explanation for experimental results, no-
tably the effects of stress state and particle volume
fraction on ductility.
Plane strain tensile specimens are, unlike axisym-
metric tensile specimens, prone to shear localization.
Cracks initiate at the surface at shear offsets and
propagate inward by void sheet formation. Like
axisymmetric tensile specimens, the ductility of plane
strain tensile specimens can be sensitive to particle
volume fraction. Hancock and Brown [125] suggest
that the ductility of plane strain tensile specimens is
primarily determined by stress-state and thus can be
rationalized in terms of the effect of stress state on the
void growth rate. Given the tendency of these speci-
mens to exhibit flow localization, this conclusion
should be regarded as tentative [150].
Fracture initiation toughness, unlike tensile duc-
tility, is significantly influenced by particle spacing.
This dependence on particle spacing arises from the
steep gradients in strain, stress, and stress state ahead
of the crack tip; such gradients are not observed in
tensile specimens. Because of this dependence on
paerticle spacing it is possible to manipulate defects
in such a way that two otherwise identical materials
will rank very differently in terms of tensile ductility
and fracture initiation toughness.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
While the literature on ductile fracture is exhaus-
tive it is clear that many fundamental issues remain
unresolved. Such issues include basic understanding
 Ductile
of the three stages of ductile fracture and our ability
to predict measures of ductility and toughness.
Much additional work remains before the nu-
cleation event is understood. For example, while
stress state, strength of the interfacial bond between
the particle and matrix, matrix flow properties, and
particle volume fraction all appear to be important in
determining the nucleation strain for nucleation by
interfacial decohesion, there is no agreement, at least
in terms of modeling, as to the role of particle size on
the nucleation event. Separating nucleation from void
growth appears to be a major experimental difficulty.
Our current qualitative understanding of ductile
fracture is primarily based on continuum descriptions
of the growth of isolated voids. Experimental tests
suggest the McClintock equations for the growth of
cylindrical voids greatly underestimate the extent of
void growth. The Rice and Tracey equation for the
growth of a spherical void appears to hold reasonably
well at small strains in materials containing a small
volume fraction of inclusions. In any case, it is
unreasonable to apply these continuum models to
large deformations of materials containing even small
particle volume fractions.
Current modeling is inadequate to predict tensile
ductilities. The Rice and Tracey equations for void
growth using actual void and particle size mea-
surements over-predict tensile ductility. Attention is
currently being given to how non-uniform particle
distributions influence ductility. But even if this is
successful in the absence of nucleation strains, there
remains the problem of incorporating the nucleation
event in modeling tensile ductility. Here there are
several problems. How does one select a measure of
nucleation which might reflect the influence of whole
distribution of particles? Second, care must be taken
to incorporate in modeling only those particles which
participate in the fracture process. By increasing
particle-matrix cohesion, for example, one might
reduce the effective volume fraction of void nucle-
ating particles. Finally, in terms of modeling, the void
growth equations, integrated from a nucleation strain
to a fracture strain, suggest nucleation strains will
improve ductility. However, it is not clear if the strain
to fructase will increase by the nucleation strain as the
rate of void growth after nucleation might be faster
than in the absence of nucleation strains.
There are even greater difficulties in predicting
fracture initiation toughness. In the absence of nu-
cleation strains it appears that 6,c will, for a tixed
fine-scale microstructure, scale as the appropriate
particle spacing at least over some range of X0.
Unfortunately, the selection of the appropriate par-
ticle spacing can only be determined on the basis of
experience and detailed experiments. However, this
does suggest that improvement in toughness can be
achieved by reducing the particle volume fraction or
by making the inclusions as large as possible; it is
emphasized that this is our judgement and pertains
only to systems containing a unimodal distribution of
PCS. 48,11--H
fracture 1071
spherical particles of a reasonably low volume frac-
tion. Experience suggests that increasing the nucle-
ation strain by reducing particle size can also improve
toughness. Therefore, if indeed void nucleation be-
comes more difficult as particle size decreases there
will be, at a fixed particle volume fraction, a trade-off
between size and spacing. There have been no
attempts to incorporate the nucleation event in
modeling fracture initiation toughness. Other funda-
mental problems include explaining the effect of
particle spacing and how fine-scale microstructure
influences toughness. Our belief is that the extent of
void growth is a convenient method of assessing
microstructural effects, but if this concept is to be
extended the rates of void growth for various blunt-
ing geometries and the possibility of super-void for-
mation at crack tips need to be investigated.
Finally, the mechanics community has been ex-
tremely active in modeling ductile fracture. Some of
these calculations can be tested. Others are presented
in such a way that tests of the predictions and results
are difficult. It would be useful to the metallurgist if
a greater effort was made to summarize these results
in approximate closed form solutions.
Acknowledgements-The authors appreciate the useful dis-
cussions with R. Asaro, A. W. Thompson and R. Stoltz.
Nor would the manuscript have been completed without the
skill of Marge Cain in preparing the manuscript, or the
patience of the editors. The work was supported in part by
the Army Research Office (WMG) and the Department of
Energy (NRM).
REFERENCES
1. Plateau J., Henry G. and Crussard C., Rev. Met. 54,
200 (1957).
2. Henry J.,.Proc. Ass. Ado. Sci. 9, 102 (1855).
3. Ludwick P. Z., 2. Ver. dt. Ing. 1532 (1927).
4. Tipper C. F., Metallurgiu 39. 133 (1948).
5. Puttick K. E., Phil. Msg. 4, $64 (i959).’
6. Rogers H. C.. Trans. AZME 218. 498 (1960).
7. Crissard C., Plateau J. Tamhanbar R.,‘Henry G. and
Lajeunesse D., Fracture (Edited by Auerbach B. L.,
Felbeck D. R., Hahn G. T. and Thomas D. A.), p. 524.
Technology Press of MIT and John Wiley, New York
(1959).
8. Palmer I. G. and Smith G. C., Proc. AZME Co&
Oxide Dispersion Strengthening, Bolton Landing, NY,
June 1966. Gordon & Breach, New York (1967).
9. Cox T. B. and Low J. R., Metall. Trans. 5, 1457 (1974).
10. Argon A. S. and Im J., Metall. Trans., 6A (4) 839
(1975).
11. Liu C. T. and Gurland J., Trans. ASM, 61, 156 (1968).
12. Broek D., Engng Fruct. Mech. 5, 55 (1973).
13. Greenfield M. A. and Margolin H., Metall. Trans., 3,
2649 (1972).
14. Margolin H., Greenfield M. A. and Greenhut I..
Tita&m Science and Technology (Edited by Jaffee
R. I. and Burke H. M.). Vol. 3. D. 1709. Plenum Press.
New York (1973). ” ‘_
15. Rogers D. H., Titanium Science and Technology (Edi-
ted by Jaffe R. I. and Burte W. M.), Vol. 3, p. 1719.
Plenum Press, New York (1973).
1072 W. M. GARRISON JR and N. R. MCODY

16. Gysler A., Lutjering G. and Gerold V., Acta metall. 22, (Edited by Taplin D. M. R.), Vol. 2, p. 343.
901 (1974). ICF4, Waterloo, Canada. Pergamon Press, New York
17. Williams J. C., Boyer R. R. and Blackburn M. J., (1978).
Electron Microfractography (Edited by Brothers A. J.) 55. Van Stone R. H. and Low J. R., Jr, NASA Tech. Rep.
ASTM STP 453, p. 215. ASTM, Philadelphia (1969). I-Ti. Carnegie Mellon Universitv. Pittsbureh (1973).
18. Asaro R. J., Acta metall. 27, 445 (1979). 56. Van Stone R H., Low J. R., Jr-and Shannon J. L:,
19. Pegel B., Schaubitz K., Burck P., Luft A., Brenner B. NASA Rep. CR-135120, Carnegie Mellon University,
and Reitzenstein W., Scripta metall. 13, 47 (1980). Pittsburgh (1977).
20. Baver R. W., Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Vir- 57. Nieh T. G. and Nix W. D., Scripta metall. 14, 365
ginia, Charlottesville, VA (1975). (1980).
21. Wilsdorf H. G. F.. Mater. Sci. Engng 59, 1 (1983). 58. Galda K. H., Munz D. and Schwalbe K.-H., Proc. 3rd
22. Rogers H. C., Ductility, p. 31. American Society for Int. Conf Titanium, May 1976, Moscow, published as
Metals, Metals Park, OH (1968). Titanium and Titanium Alloys (Edited by T. C. Will-
23. Van Stone R. H., Cox T. B., Low J. R. and Psioda iams and A. F. Belov), Vol. 1, p. 649. Plenum Press,
J. A., ht. Metals Reo. 30 (4) 157 (1985). New York (1982).
24. Rosenfield A. R., Metall. Rev. 13, 29 (1968). 59. Chesnutt J. C., Rhodes C. G. and Williams J. C.,
25. Hahn G. T., Kanninen M. F. and Rosenfield A. R., A. Fractography-Microscopic Cracking Processes (Edi-
Rev. Mater. Sci. 2, 381 (1972). ted by Beachemond C. D. and Warke W. R.), ASTM
26. Howard I. C. and Willoughby A. A., Advances in STP 600, p. 99. ASTM, Philadelphia (1976).
Fracture Mechanics (Edited by Chell G. G.), Vol. 2, p. 60. Moody N. R. and Greulich F. A., Scripta metall. 19,
39. Aonlied Science Publishers, London (1984). 1107 (1985).
27. Schwaibe K.-H., Engng Fract. Mech. 9, 795 (1977). 61. Moody N. R., Stoltz R. E. and Perra M. W., Corrosion
28. Tanaka J. P., Pampillo C. A. and Low J. R., Jr, Review Cracking (Edited bv Horl B. D.)., D. 1 54. ASM. Metals
of Developments in Plane Strain Fracture Toughness Park, cH‘(l986). .
Testing (Edited by Brown W. F., Jr), ASTM STP 463, 62. Moody N. R., Stoltz R. E. and Perra M. W., Metall.
p. 191. ASTM, Philadelphia (1970). Trans ISA, 1469 (1987).
29. Psioda J. A., Ph.D. thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 63. Robertson I. M. and Birnbaum H. K., Acta metall. 34,
Pittsburgh (1977). 353 (1986).
30. Wilcox B. A. and Clauer A. H., Trans. AIME, 212,750 64. Argon A. S., Im J. and Safoglu R., Metall. Trans. 6A,
(1958). 825 (1975).
31. Gurland J., Acta metall. 20, 735 (1972). 65. Argon A. S. and Im J., Metall. Trans. 6A, 839 (1975)
32. French I. E. and Weinrich D. F., Scripta metall. 8, 87 66. Gurland J. and Plateau J., Trans. ASM 56,442 (1963).
(1974). 67. Laszlo F., J. Iron Steel Inst. 147, 173 (1943).
33. Coffin L. F. and Rogers H. C., Trans. ASM 60, 672 68. Laszlo F., J. Iron Steel Inst. 148. 137 (1943).
(1967). 69. Laszlo F.: J. Iron Steel Inst. 150; 183 (1944).
34. Chen’C. W., Acta metall. 9, 68 (1961). 70. Laszlo F., J. Iron Steel Inst. 152, 207 (1945).
35. Humphreys F. J. and Stewart A. T., Surface Sci. 31, 71. Brooksbank D. and Andrews K. W., J. Iron Steel Inst.
389 (1972). 206, 595 (1968).
36. Fischmeister H. F., Navarra E. and Easterling K. E., 72. Brooksbank D. and Andrews K. W., J. Iron Steel Inst.
Metal Sci. J. 6, 211 (1972). 207, 474 (1969).
37. Ashby M., Phil. Mag. 14, 1157 (1966). 73. Brooksbank D. and Andrews K. W., J. Iron Steel Inst.
38. Gessinaer G. H.. Fischmeister H. F. and Lukas H. L., 208, 495 (1970).
Powde; Metall. i6 (31) 119 (1973). 74. Brooksbank D. and Andrews K. W., J. Iron Steel Inst.
39. Franklin J. E., Judd G. and Ansell G. S., Proc. 3rd 208, 582 (1970).
ICSMA, Vol. 1, p. 345. Iron and Steel Institute, 75. Brooksbank D. and Andrews K. W., J. Iron Steel Inst.
London (1973). 210, 246 (1972).
40. Cane B. J. and Middletown C. J., Metal Sci 15, 302 76. Brooksbank D. and Andrews K. W., J. Iron Steel Inst.
(1981). 210, 765 (1972).
41. Easterling K. E., Fischmeister H. F. and Navarra E., 77. Tanaka K.. Mori T. and Nakamura T.. Phil. Man.
Y 21.,
Powder Metall. 16 (31), 128 (1973). 267 (1970):
42. Sundstrom B., Engng Fract. Mech. 6, 483 (1974). 78. Brown L. M. and Stobbs W. M., Phil. Mag. 34, 351
43. Rellick J. R. and McMahon C. J., Metall. Trans. 5, (1976).
2439 (1974). 79. Argon A. S., J. Engng Mater. Tech., Trans. ASME, 98,
44. Smith C. L. and Low J. R., Jr, Metall. Trans 5, 279 60 (1976).
(1974). 80. Argon A. S., Im J. and Needleman A., Metall. Trans.
45. King J. E. and Knott J. F., Metall. Sci. 15 (1), 1 (1981). 6A, 815 (1975).
46. Hippsley C. A. and Druce S. G.,Acta metall. 31 (II), 81. Rhee S. S. and McClintock F. A., Proc. 4th U.S. Nat1
1861 (1983). Cong. Appl. Mech., Vol. 2, p. 1007. ASME, New York
47. Gangulee A. and Gurland J., Trans. AIME, 239, 269 (1962).
(1967). 82. Goods S. H. and Brown L. M., Acta metall. 27, 1
48. Butler B. R. and Allen P. L., Metal Sci. 11,462 (1977). (1979).
49. Kozasu I., Shimizu T. and Kubota H., Trans. Iron 83. Fisher J. R. and Gurland J., Metal. Sci. 15, 185 (1981).
Steel Inst. Jon 13. 20 (1973). 84. Fisher J. R. and Gurland J., Metal. Sci. 15, 193 (1981).
50. Beremin F. M., tietall. Trans. 12A, 723 (1981). 85. McLean D., Mechanical Properties of Metals, p. 224,
51. Lindlev T. C.. Oates G. and Richards C. E., Acta John Wiley, New York (1962).
metall.* 18, 1127 (1970). 86. McClintock F. A., J. appl. Mech., Trans. ASME 90,
52. Cochrane R. C., JISI, Effects of Second Phase Particles 363 (1968).
on Mechanical Properties of Steel, p. 101. The Iron and 87. McClintock F. A., Ductility, p. 255. ASM, Metals
Steel Institute, London (1971). Park, OH (1968).
53. Restaino P. A. and McMahon C. J., Jr, Trans. A.S.M. 88. Berg C. A., in Proc. 4th U.S. Nat1 Cong. Appl. Mech.,
60, 699 (1967). Vol. 2, p. 855. ASME, New York (1962).
54. Thompson A. W. and Williams J. C., Advances in 89. McClintock F. A., Kaplan S. M. and Berg C. A., Int.
Research on the Strength and Fracture of Materials J. Fract. Mech. 2, 614 (1966).
 Ductile fracture 1073

90. McClintock F. A., Fracture (Edited by H. Leibowitz), 123. Chen W., Inc. J. Solids Struct., 7, 685 (1971).
Vol. 3, 47. Academic Press. New York (1971). 124. Norris D. M. Jr, Moran B., Scudder J. K. and
91. Perra M. W, Ph.D. thesis; University of California, Quinones R. F., J. Mech. Phys. Solids 26, 1 (1978).
Berkeley, CA (1976). 125. Hancock J. W. and Brown D. K., J. Mech. Phys.
92. Rice J. R. and Tracey D. M., J. Mech. Phys. Solids 17, Solids 31, 1 (1983).
201 (1969). 126. Hancock J. W. and MacKenzie A. C., J. Mech. Phys.
93. Tracey D. M., Engng Fract. Mech. 3, 301 (1971). Solids 24, 147 (1976).
94. Marini B., Mudry F. and Pineau A., Engng Fract. 127. MacKenzie A. C., Hancock J. W. and Brown D. K.,
Mech. 22, 989 (985). Engng Fract. Mech. 9, 167 (1977).
95. Mudry F., These d’Etat, Universitt de Technologie de 128. Edelson B. I. and Baldwin W. M., Trans. ASM, 55,230
Compiegne (1982). (1962).
96. Needleman A., J. appl. Mech. Trans. ASME, 94, 964 129. Lentz J. S., J. Pressure Vessel Technology, Trans.
(1972). ASME 100, 77 (1978).
97. Floreen S. and Hayden H. W., Scripta metall. 4, 87 130. Speich G. R. and Spitzig W. A., Metall. Trans. 13A,
(1970). 2239 (1982).
98. Bluhm J. I. and Morrissey R. J., Proc. 1st Inc. Conf. 131. Bernard G., Grumbach M. and Moliexe F., Metals
Fracture (Edited bv Yokobori T. et al.).,. Vol. III. _v. Tech 2, 512 (1975).
1739. Sendai, Japan (1966). 132. Wilson A. D., J. Engng Mater. Tech., Trans. ASME,
99. Cottrell A. H., Fracture (Edited by Averbach B. L., 101, 265 (1975).
Felbeck D. R., Hahn G. T. and Thomas D. A.), p. 20. 133. Corti C. W., Cotterill P. and Fitzpatric A.. Inc. Metals
Technology Press of MIT and John Wiley, New York Rev. 19, 77 (1979).
(1959). 134. Brown L. M. and Embury J. D., Proc. 3rd Inc. Conf.
100. Beevers C. J. and Honeycombe R. W. K., Phil. Mug. Strength of Metals and Alloys, p. 161. Iron and Steel
7, 763 (1962). Institute, London (1975).
101. Garber R., Bernstein I. M. and Thompson A. W., 135. Rosenfield A. R. and Hahn G. T., Trans. ASM 59,962
Scripta metall. 10, 341 (1976). (1966).
102. Garber R., Bernstein I. M. and Thompson A. W., 136. Stout M. G. and Gerberich W. W., Metall. Trans. 9A,
Metall. Trans. 12A, 225 (1981). 649 (1978).
103. Thompson L. D., Proc. Earl R, Parker Symp. Struc- 137. LeRoy G., Emburv J. D.. Edward G. and Ashbv
ture Propery Relationships (Edited by Antolovich M. F.: Actn metall.-29, 1509 (1981).
S. D., Ritchie R. 0. and Gerberich W. W.), n. 391. 138. Kirkcaldv D.. Proc. Scot. Shiobuild. Ass.. , Glaseow.
WI
TME-AIME, Warrendale, PA (1986). _ Appendix, p. 74 (186&61). *
104. Roesch L. and Henrv G.. Electron Microfractoaravhv 139. Izod E. G., Engineering 76, 431 (1903).
(Edited by Brothers- A. J.), ASTM STP 453, p. 3. 140. Charpy G., Proc. Inc. Ass. for Testing Materials Vol.
ASTM, Philadelphia (1969). 1, Report III (1909).
105. Low J. R., Jr, Prospects ofFracture Mechanics (Edited 141. Ludwik P. and Scheu R., Stal Eisen 43, 999 (1923).
by Sih G. C., VanElstrand H. C. and Broek D:). Vol. Summarized in J. Iron Steel Inst. 108, 457 (1923).
35. Noordhoff, Leyden (1974). 142. Agogino A. M., J. Engng Mater. Tech., Trans ASME
106. Van Stone R. H., Merchant R. H. and Low J. R., Jr, 100, 348 (1978).
Fatigue and Fracture Toughness-Cryogenic Behavior 143. Earl J. C. and Brown D. K., Engng Fract. Mech. 8,599
(Edited by Hickev C. F., Jr and Broadwell R. G.). (1976).
ASTM STP 556, p. 93 ASTM Philadelphia (1973). ‘. 144. Thomson R. D. and Hancock J. W., Inc. J. Fract. 26,
107. Jay G. D. and Nutting J., Effects of Second Phase 99 (1984).
Particles on Mechanical Properties of Steel, v. 95. The 145. Hancock J. W. and Thomson R. D., Muter. Sci. Tech.
Iron and Steel Institute, London (1971). _ 1, 684 (1985).
108. Baker T. J. and Johnson R.. J. Iron Steel Inst. 211.783 146. Yamamoto H., Inc. J. Fract. 14, 347 (1978).
(1973). 147. Saje M., Pan J. and Needleman A., Inc. J. Fract. 19,
109. Ritchie R. 0. and Knott J. F., Metall. Trans. 5, 782 163 (1982).
(1974). 148. Tvergaard V., Int. J. Solid Struct. 18, 659 (1982).
110. O’Brien R. N., Jack D. H. and Nutting J., Heat 149. Tvergaard V. and Needleman A., Acta metall. 32, 157
Treatment ‘76, Proc. 16th Inc. Heat Treatment Conf, (1984).
p. 161. The Metals Society, London (1977). 150. Needleman A. and Tvergaard, J. Mech. Phys. Solidr
111. Baker T. J.. Sulfide Inclusions in Steel. _ v. 135. ASM. 32, 461 (1984).
Metals Park, OH (1975). 151. Corrigan D. A., Travis R. E., Ardito V. P. and Adams
112. Ludtka G. M. and Laughlin D. E., Metall. Trans. 13A, C. M., Jr., Welding J. Res. Suppl. 41, 123-S (1962).
411 (1982). 152. Lee D. and Backofen W. A.., Trans. AIME, 236, 1077
113. Kirman I., Metall. Trans. 2, 1761 (1971). (1966).
114. Edelson B. I., Trans. ASM 56, 82 (1963). 153. Lee S., Majno L. and Asaro R. J., Metall. Trans. 16A,
115. Bourcier R. J. and Koss D. A., Proc. 5th Inc. Co& 1633 (1984).
Fracture (Edited by Francois D.), Vol. 1, p. 187. 154. Slatcher S. and Knott J. F., Adv. in Fracture Research
Pergamon Press, New York (1980). (Fracture 84) Vol. 2, p. 1473. Pergamon Press, Oxford
116. Nemat-nasser S. and Taya M., Continuum Models of (1984).
Discrete Systems (Edited by Provan J. W.), p. 387. 155. Anand L. and Spitzig W. A., J. Mech. Phys. Solids 28,
Universitv of Waterloo Press, Waterloo (1980). 113 (1980).
117. Tvergaard V., Inc. J. Fract. 17, 389 (198i). 156. McMeeking R. M. and Rice J. R., Inc. J. Solids Struct
118. Tveraaard V.. J. Mech. Phvs. Solids 30. 265 (1982). 11, 601 (1975).
119. Gurson A. L.; J. Engng Miter. Tech., Trans. ASME, 157. Burke M. A. and Nix W. D., Inc. J. Solids Struct. 15,
99, 2 (1977). 379 (1979).
120. Clausing D. P., Inc. J. Fract. Mech. 6, 71 (1970). 158. Ohno N. and Hutchinson J. N., J. Mech. Phys. Solids
121. Bridgman P. W., Studies in Large Plastic Flow and 32, 63 (984).
Fracture. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA 159. Tvergaard V., Needleman A. and Lo K. K., J. Mech.
(1964). Phys. Solids 29, 115 (1981).
122. Needleman A., J. Mech. Phys. Solids 20, 111 (1972). 160. Spitzig W. A., Acta metall. 33, 175 (1985).
1074 W. M. GARRISON JR
161. Hahn G. T., Barnes C. R. and Rosenfield A. R.,
Aerospace Research Lab. Rep. ARLTR75-0194,
Wright-Patterson Airforce Base, OH (1975).
162. Clausing D. P., U.S. Stel Res. Lab. Rep. 35.066 (1972).
163. ASTM E399-83. Standard Test Method for Plane
Strain Fracture Toughness of Metallic Materials, 1983
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 3, p. 170.
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadel-
phia (1983). _ 185. McMeeking R. M., J. Mech. Phvs. Solids 25. 357
164. Knott J. F., Fundamentals of Fracture Mechanics.
Butterworths, London (1973).
165. ASTM E813-81, Standard Test Method for J,=, a
Measure of Fracture Toughness, 1983 Annual Book of
ASTM St&a&is, Section 3, p. 762. American Society
for Testing and Materials. Philadeluhia (1983).
166. Begley J. A. and Landes’J. D., Fiacturk Toughness,
ASTM STP 514, p. 201. American Society for Testing
and Materials, Philadelphia (1974).
167. Shih C. F., J. Mech. Phys. Solids 29, 305 (1981).
168. McMeeking R. M., J. Engng Mater. Technol. Trans.
ASME 99, 290 (1977).
169. Rice J. R. and Johnson M. A., Inelastic Behavior of
Solids (Edited bv Kanninen M. F.. Adler W. G..
Rosenfield A. k. and Jaffee R. I.), p. 641:
McGraw-Hill, New York (1970).
170. Krafft J. M., Appl. Mater. Res. 3, 88 (1964).
171. Hahn G. T. and Rosenfield A. R., Applhations Related
Phenomena in Titanium Allovs, ASTM SIP 432.
pp. 5-32. American Society for-Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia (1968).
172. Birkle A. J., Wei R. P. and Pellissier G. E., Trans.
ASM, 59, 981 (1966).
173. Spitzig W. A., Trans. ASM, 61, 344 (1968).
174. Lautridou J. C. and Pineau A., Engng Fract. Mech. 15,
55 (1981).
175. Green G. and Knott J. F., J. Engng Mater. Technol.,
Trans. ASME 98, 37 (1976).
176. Garrison W. M., Jr., Metall. Trans. 17A, 669 (1986).
177. Garrison W. M., Jr. and Moody N. R., Metall. Trans.
18A, 1257 (1987).
178. McKlintock F. A., J. appl. Mech. Trans. ASME 25,
363 (1958).
179. Bates R. C., Metallurgical Treatises (Edited by Tien
J. K. and Elliott J. F.), p. 551. TMS-AIME, War-
rendale, PA (1982).
and N. R. MOODY
180. Ritche R. O., Server W. L. and Wullaert R. A., Metall.
Trans. lOA, 1557 (1979).
181. Osborne D. E. and Embury J. D., Metall. Trans. 4,
2051 (1973).
182. Pandey R. K. and Banerjee S., Engng Fract. Mech. 10,
817 (1978).
183. Schwalbe K. H., Engng Fract. Mech. 6, 415 (1974).
184. Garrison W. M. Jr, Scripta metall, 18, 583 (1984).
(1977). -
186. Garrison W. M. Jr., Proc. Earl R. Parker Symp.
Structure Property Relationships (Edited by
Antolovich S. D., Ritchie R. 0. and Gerberich W. W.),
p. 187. TMS-AIME (1985).
187. Garrison W. M. Jr.,‘Scrt&a metall. 20, 633 (1986).
188. Moodv N. R.. Garrison W. M. Jr. Smueereskv J. E.
and Costa J. E. (to be published).’ I -
189. Aravas N. and McMeeking R. M., J. Mech. Phys.
Solids, 33, 25 (1985).
190. Begley J. A., private communication.
191. Hancock J. W. and Cowling M. J., Metal Sci. 14, 293
(1980).
192. McMeeking R. M., Presented at the Adv. Res.
Workshop Chemistry and Physics of Fracture, Bad
Reichenhall, FDR, 23 June-l July (1986).
193. Ritchie R. O., Smith R. F. and Knott J. F., Metal Sci.
9, 485 (1975).
194. Knott J. F., Conf. Proc.: Micromechanisms of Crack
Extension Mechanics and Phvsics of Fracture II. Cam-
bridge (1980), in Metal Sci.. 14, 327 (1980).
195. Needleman A. and Tvergaard V., An Analysis of
Ductile Rupture Modes at a Crack Tip. Brown Univer-
sity, Division of Engineering, Providence, RI (1986).
196. Ritchie R. 0. and Thomuson A. W.. Metall. Trans.
16A, 233 (1985). -
197. Marder A. R., Metall. Trans. 13A, 85 (1982).
198. Needleman A. and Rice J. R., Mechanics of Sheet
Metal Forming: Material Behavior and Deformation
Analysts (Edited by Koistinen D. P. and Wang Neng-
Ming), p. 237. Plenum Press, New York (1978).
199. Handerhan K. J. Ph.d Thesis, Carnegie-Mellon Uni-
versity, Pittsburgh September (1987)
200. Thompson A. W. and Ashby M. F., Scripta Metall. 18,
127 (1984).