Composites Part A 29A (1998) 1057–1062

1359-835X/98/$ - see front matter

q 1998 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
PII: S1359-835X(98)00010-4

A new dislocation-like model for imperfect

interfaces and their effect on load transfer

H.Y. Yu
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375-5343, USA

A dislocation-like model is proposed to describe the boundary conditions of an imperfect interface. In this new
model, a thin layer of interphase material is introduced near the interface. In the limit of vanishing layer thickness,
the interfacial tractions become continuous, but the displacements on either side of the interphase layer become
discontinuous. The jump in the displacement at the interface is described by Somigliana dislocations. The variable
discontinuity of displacement across the interface is assumed to be linearly proportional to the displacement at the
interface of the constituent where the elastic singularity is. The result of applying this model is equivalent to
introducing two effective interfacial moduli of rigidity. Using this model, the effect of imperfect interfaces on load
transfer is studied. The Green’s function is obtained for two semi-infinite solids with a planar interface. The elastic
fields due to defects such as inclusions and dislocations are also given. q 1998 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
All rights reserved

(Keywords: interfacial properties; dislocation-like model; elastic field; Green’s function; dislocations)

INTRODUCTION thickness, the interfacial tractions become continuous, but

Interfaces are features in all materials other than infinite
homogeneous solids or infinite single crystals. The proper-
ties of an imperfect interface are as important as the
properties of the materials themselves. For a perfect
interface, the two solids are either perfectly bonded together
(both the tractions and displacements are continuous at the
interface) or in smooth contact with each other (allowing
free tangential slip at the interface). However, the interfaces
are seldom perfect and the exact theoretical modeling is
very difficult. Therefore, some simplified interfacial models
have been introduced to simulate the actual behavior of
imperfect interfaces. For example, Van der Merwe1,2
studied the strain energy of an interface by assuming that
the interface is (1) a boundary caused by a difference in
atomic spacing, (2) a twist boundary, or (3) a symmetrical
tilt boundary. His calculations are based on the assumptions
introduced by Peierls3 and Nabarro4 in dealing with a single
dislocation. He noted5 that: A range of bond strength
between the two crystals is likewise cared for in terms of an
interfacial rigidity modulus m. Similarly, the three-phase
model6–9 introduces an interphase or a mesophase with elastic
constants different from those on either side of it to represent
an imperfect interface. This layer has a given thickness.
Continuity of tractions and displacements is assumed at both
matrix–layer and layer–reinforcement interfaces.
Another popular model is the linear spring-like
model10–16 in which a thin layer of interphase material is
introduced near the interface. In the limit of vanishing layer
the displacements at either side of the interface layer
become discontinuous, the jump in displacement being
linearly proportional to the interfacial traction. The
boundary conditions at the planar interface x 3 ¼ 0 are
j3i 9 ¼ j3i , uk 9 ¹ uk ¼ kT jk3 , u3 9 ¹ u3 ¼ kN j33 (1)
where i ¼ 1, 2, 3, k ¼ 1, 2, u i and j ij are, respectively, the
displacement and stress in the half-space x 3 $ 0 (solid I), ui 9
and jij 9 are, respectively, the displacement and stress in the
half-space x 3 # 0 (solid II), and k T and k N are the so-called
spring constant-type material parameters in the tangential
and the normal directions of the interface, respectively. It
follows from eqn (1) that k T ¼ k N ¼ 0 corresponds to a
perfectly bonded interface, while k T ¼ k N → ` represents
a completely unbonded interface. Recently, a new dis-
location-like model17 has been proposed to describe
mathematically the effect of an imperfect interface on the
load transfer. The boundary conditions for this new model
are similar to the linear spring-like model except that the
jump in displacement at the interface is assumed to be
linearly proportional to the displacement at the interface
of the constituent where the load is applied. By using this
model, the maximum shear stresses calculated at the inter-
face18 agree qualitatively with experimental measure-
ments19. In experimental study19, the maximum shear
stress along the interface in bimaterials due to a spherical
inclusion with dilatational eigenstrain is measured by a
photoelastic technique. The results showed that for a

1057
Dislocation-like model for imperfect interfaces: H. Y. Yu
Figure 1 Two joined elastic half-spaces with an imperfect interface
perfectly bonded interface, the maximum shear stress at the
interface decreases monotonically as the distance from
the inclusion increases. For an imperfect interface, the
maximum interfacial shear stress first decreases, then
increases to some peak value before it gradually diminishes,
i.e. it shows a minimum and a maximum. Even though the
three-phase model and spring-like model have been used
extensively, there is still no point force solution (Green’s
function) available in the literature due to the mathematical
difficulties. In this study, the dislocation-like model will be
introduced first, then the Green’s function and the elastic
field due to inclusions and dislocations in a bimaterial with a
planar imperfect interface described by the dislocation-like
model will be given.
DISLOCATION-LIKE MODEL
As shown in Figure 1, two joined semi-infinite isotropic
elastic solids consist of solid I (x 3 $ 0) with shear modulus
m, and Poisson’s ratio n, and solid II (x 3 # 0) with shear
modulus m9 and Poisson’s ratio n9. The dislocation-like
model is similar to the linear spring-like model except that
the jump in displacement at the interface is assumed to be
linearly proportional to the displacement at the interface of
the constituent where the load is applied. Therefore, when
the cause of deformation is in solid I, the boundary
conditions at the interface x 3 ¼ 0 are
j3i 9 ¼ j3i , uk 9 ¼ hT uk , u3 9 ¼ hN u3
where i ¼ 1, 2, 3, k ¼ 1, 2, and h T and h N are two parameters
that describe the bonding conditions in the tangential and
the normal directions of the interface, respectively. It is seen
that h T ¼ h N ¼ 1 implies vanishing of the displacement
jumps and therefore the two solids are perfectly bonded
together. At the other extreme, h T ¼ h N ¼ 0 implies that
the two solids are completely unbonded and x 3 ¼ 0 is a free
1058
surface. Any values of either parameter between zero and 1
define an imperfect interface. In the following, the term
‘ideal interface’ means that the two solids are either per-
fectly bonded together or completely unbonded.
The jumps in displacement at the interface can also be
described by Somigliana’s dislocations. In the investigation
of the solution of the elastic field due to an ellipsoidal
inclusion in an infinite isotropic matrix when sliding takes
place along the inclusion–matrix interface, Mura and
Furuhashi20 proposed that the shear stress on the inclu-
sion–matrix interface in the perfect bonding case be relaxed
by the creation of Somigliana’s dislocations b i that equal the
displacement jump at the interface, i.e.
bi ¼ ui ¹ ui 9 ðx3 ¼ 0Þ (3)
The boundary conditions in eqn (2) are then equivalent to
the creation of Somigliana’s dislocations whose compo-
nents are linearly proportional to the displacement u i in
solid I at the interface, i.e.
bk ¼ (1 ¹ hT )uk and b3 ¼ (1 ¹ hN )u3 (4)
where k ¼ 1, 2.
GREEN’S FUNCTION
The boundary condition at the interface x 3 ¼ 0 is given in
eqn (2). The point force is acting at point (xp1 , xp2 , xp3 ) in solid
I. To simplify the expression, Galerkin vectors G and G9 are
used to represent the elastic fields at a point (x 1,x 2,x 3) in
solid I and solid II, respectively, where21
1
u¼ [2(1 ¹ n)=2 G ¹ ==·G] and
2m
1
u9 ¼ [2(1 ¹ n9)=2 G9 ¹ ==·G9] ð5Þ
2m9
where =, =· and = 2 are, respectively, the gradient, diver-
gence and Laplacian operators. The stresses are
jij ¼ lum, m þ m(ui, j þ uj, i ) (6)
for points in solid I and
jij 9 ¼ l9um, m 9 þ m9(ui, j 9 þ uj, i 9) (7)
for points in solid II where l and l9 are, respectively, the
Lamé constants for solid I and solid II. The usual subscript
notation has been used (a repeated subscript indicates sum-
mation over the values 1, 2, 3, and subscripts preceded by a
comma denote differentiation with respect to the Cartesian
coordinates corresponding to those subscripts).
The Green’s function is obtained by using the image
(2) method for obtaining the elastic fields due to nuclei of strain
in either joined half-spaces with an ideal interface or two
half-spaces in frictionless contact with each other22. The
elastic solution for solid I corresponding to a point force S 0
at point (xp1 , xp2 , xp3 ) is composed of S 0 itself, the image of the
point force a 0S 0, and other fictitious higher-order singu-
larities (nuclei of strain) a jS j (j ¼ 1,2,3,…,n) at the image
point (xp1 , xp2 , ¹ xp3 ), where S j denotes the type of nucleus of
strain, and a j the corresponding effective strength of that
 Dislocation-like model for imperfect interfaces: H. Y. Yu

nucleus. The solution in region II is composed of the

A2 ¼ 2(1 þ k)m(mN ¹ mT )D
fictitious nuclei of strain A jS j (j ¼ 0,1,2,…,n) with effective
strengths A j at point (xp1 , xp2 , xp3 ) in region I. The effective (1 þ k)D
strengths a j and A j are then obtained for the different A3 ¼ {[(1 ¹ k)(1 ¹ k9)(mT ¹ m) ¹ 2(k ¹ k9)m]mmT
m þ mT
boundary conditions by solving a set of simultaneous linear
algebraic equations (by using the software MATHEMA- ¹(1¹k)m2 mN þ[(1 ¹ 2kþkk9)mþk(1 ¹ k9)mT ]mN mT }
TICA). It is found that, for S 0 in a bimaterial with an
imperfect interface described by the dislocation-like model A4 ¼ (1 þ k)D[(1 ¹ k)(2mT ¹ m)mN ¹ (1 þ k ¹ 2k9)mmT ]
eqn (2), the set of S j is the same as that for the joined half-
spaces with ideal interface problem22. It should be noted (1 þ k)D
A5 ¼ {[(1 ¹ k)(1 ¹ k9)(mT þ mN ¹ m)
that, since the solutions are linear superpositions of different (1 þ k9)(m þ mT )
nuclei of strain, the supplementary conditions regarding
¹ 2(k ¹ k9)m]mmT ¹ (1 ¹ k)(1 þ k9)m2 mN
equilibrium, compatibility and the vanishing of the
displacement and stress fields at infinity are automatically þ 2k(1 ¹ k9)mN m2T }
satisfied. The solutions also exhibit the proper signularity
for a nucleus of strain at the loading point because the image 1
D¼
and fictitious nuclei of strain for the solution for region I are (m þ kmT )(mN þ k9m) þ (m þ kmN )(mT þ k9m)
located in region II, and vice versa. The results are as
follows, where, without loss of generality, a multiplying k ¼ 3 ¹ 4n, k9 ¼ 3 ¹ 4n9, mT ¼ hT m9, mN ¼ hN m9
constant has been omitted in the Galerkin vectors g i for a
point force in the x i-direction.
(b) Single force normal to the interface, i.e. single force in
(a) Point force parallel to the interface, i.e. in the x i-direc- the x 3-direction
tion where i ¼ 1, 2.
g3 ¼ (R1 þ b1 R2 þ b2 c2 þ b3 xp3 w2 þ b4 xp3 x3 J2 )x3
gi ¼ (R1 þ a1 R2 þ a2 xp2 p
3 J2 þ a3 þ a4 x3 w2 )xi g3 9 ¼ (B1 R1 þ b2 c1 þ B3 xp3 w1 þ B4 xp3 x3 J1 )x3 (10)
¹ [a2 xp3 R2, i ¹ a5 (xi ¹ xpi )w2 ]x3 ð8Þ where

gi 9 ¼ (A1 R1 þ A2 xp2 p
3 J1 þ A3 c1 þ A4 x3 w1 )xi
b1 ¼ ¹ 1 þ (1 þ k)m[2k9m þ (1 þ k9)mT þ (1 ¹ k9)mN ]D
þ [A2 xp3 R1, i þ A5 (xi ¹ xpi )w1 ]x3
m
b2 ¼ ¹ B ¼ (1 þ k)m[(1 ¹ k)k9m ¹ (1 ¹ k9)kmN ]D
mT 2
where x j is the unit vector in the x j-direction,
b3 ¼ {(1 ¹ k9)m[(3 ¹ k)mT þ (1 ¹ 3k)mN ]
R2, ¼ (x1 ¹ xp1 )2 þ (x2 ¹ xp2 )2 þ z2,
¹ 4(1 ¹ k)(mN mT ¹ k9m2 )}D
1
J, ¼ ; w, ¼ log[R, þ ( ¹ 1), z, ]
R, b4 ¼ a 2 ð11Þ
c, ¼ R, ¹ ( ¹ 1), z, w, ; z, ¼ x3 þ ( ¹ 1), xp3 ; , ¼ 1, 2 B1 ¼ (1 þ k)[(1 ¹ k)m(mN þ mT ) þ 2kmN (m þ mT )]D
m ¹ mT
a1 ¼
m þ mT B3 ¼ (1 þ k){2[(1 ¹ k)mN ¹ (1 ¹ k9)m]mT
þ (1 ¹ k)m(mN ¹ mT )}D
a2 ¼ 2D[2(mN mT ¹ k9m2 ) ¹ (1 ¹ k9)m(mN þ mT )]
B 4 ¼ A2
(1 þ k)mD
a3 ¼ {2(k ¹ k9)mN mT
m þ mT
þ (m ¹ mT )[(1 ¹ k9)hmT þ (1 ¹ k)mN i þ (1 ¹ k)k9m]} The displacements and stresses due to the point forces are
obtained by substituting eqns (8) and (10) into eqns (5)–(7)
a4 ¼ (1 þ k)(1 ¹ k9)m(mN ¹ mT )D which are functions of (x 1,x 2,x 3), (xp1 , xp2 , xp3 ), m, n, m9; n9,
hT m9 and h Nm9. This means that making the assumption
mD described by eqn (2) is equivalent to introducing two
a5 ¼ {(1¹ k9)[(1þk)mT ¹(1¹k)m]mT¹2(k¹k9)mN mT parameters h Tm9 and m Nm9 which will be called the
mþmT
‘tangential interfacial modulus of rigidity’ and the ‘radial
¹ (1 ¹ k)[(1 ¹ k9)(m ¹ mT )mNþ 2k9m2 ]} ð9Þ interfacial modulus of rigidity’, respectively. It should be
noted that when h T ¼ h N ¼ h, eqns (8)–(11) are the Green’s
2(1 þ k)mT
A1 ¼ functions for ideal interfaces when the shear modulus of
(1 þ k9)(m þ mT ) solid II is hm922. This means that the effect of the imperfect

1059
Dislocation-like model for imperfect interfaces: H. Y. Yu

interface on the load transfer is equivalent to lowering the at point (x 1,x 2,x 3) in solid I and solid II, respectively, where
modulus of rigidity of solid II by a factor of h. However, this ] ]
is true only for the elastic displacement. To calculate the gjk ¼ g and gjk 9 ¼ p gk 9 (14)
]xpj k ]xj
stresses by Hooke’s law, eqns (6) and (7), the original elastic
moduli for solids I and II must be used. When h ¼ 1 or 0, g jk and gjk 9 are the Galerkin vectors for double force (when j
eqns (8)–(11) are the Green’s functions for two solids ¼ k) and for double force with moment (when j Þ k). From
perfectly bonded together or completely unbonded, respec- eqns (8)–(11), the Galerkin vectors g i for the point force in
tively. the x i-direction in an infinite isotropic solid is
The boundary condition eqn (2) does not include the gi ¼ R 1 x i (15)
sliding interface, i.e. two semi-infinite solids in frictionless
contact with each other. For this sliding interface, the Substituting eqn (15) into eqns (12) and (5) gives
boundary conditions are j33 9 ¼ j 33, u3 9 ¼ h Nu 3, j3k 9 ¼ j 3k Z
1
¼ 0 (k ¼ 1, 2). The Green’s functions for this interface are ui ¼ [eT R ¹ 4(1 ¹ n)eTik J1, k ¹ 2neTmm J1, i ]dQ
8p(1 ¹ n) Q jk 1, ijk
obtained by substituting m9 by h Nm9 in the point force
(16)
solutions given previously by Yu and Sanday22 for the ideal
sliding interface. which is the solution given by Eshelby31.
The Green’s functions for two semi-infinite solids with a The Galerkin vectors due to a homogeneous inclusion of
planar imperfect interface given in eqns (8) and (10) consist any shape and with eigenstrain eTij in a bimaterial with an
of the same nuclei of strain as for those with a perfect imperfect interface is obtained by substituting eqns (8), (10)
interface22. The only difference between them is the and (14) into eqns (12) and (13). The elastic displacements
coefficients a i, A i, b i and B i given in eqns (9) and (11) and stresses are obtained by substituting eqns (12) and (13)
which are independent of the coordinates. The elastic fields into eqns (5)–(7). Thus, as an illustrative example, if the
due to defects in two semi-infinite solids with a perfect eigenstrain of the inclusion is purely dilatational, i.e.
interface have been presented by using these Green’s
functions. The defects are inclusions23–26, point defects27, eTij ¼ «dij (17)
dislocations28,29 and disclinations30. The results of these
existing studies on defects are applicable directly to the where d ij is the Kronecker delta and e is a constant, then
present study simply by substituting the expressions for the eqns (12) and (13) become
Z
coefficients a i, A i, b i and B i. In the following, the methods (1 ¹ n)m«
of obtaining the elastic solutions due to inclusions, G¼ g dQ (18)
4p(1 ¹ n)(1 ¹ 2n) Q nn
dislocations and disclinations will only be outlined, and
two simple examples will be presented. and
Z
(1 þ n)m«
G9 ¼ gnm 9dQ (19)
4p(1 ¹ n)(1 ¹ 2n) Q

respectively. By substituting eqns (8)–(10) into eqn (14),

INCLUSIONS the Galerkin vectors for the sum of three double forces
without moment are
A basic problem in elasticity is the transformation inclusion gnn ¼ ¹ [(k ¹ 1)w1 þ c1 w2 þ c2 x3 J2 ]x3 (20)
problem. In this problem, a subdomain Q (inclusion) of a
domain (matrix) undergoes a spontaneous change of shape and
that, without the constrained of the domain, would be some gnn 9 ¼ ¹ (c1 9w1 þ c2 9x3 J1 )x3 (21)
prescribed stress-free transformation strain (misfit strain,
where
eigenstrain), eTij . The constraint imposed by the matrix
engenders an elastic field that is to be determined every- c1 ¼ b2 ¹ b3 ¹ (k ¹ 1)a1 þ a3 þ 2a5 ,
where in the matrix and the inclusion. The problem
c2 ¼ ¹ (b1 þ a1 þ a2 þ a5 )
considered here is that of the homogeneous inclusion, i.e.
the inclusion has the same elastic constants as the matrix. By
c1 9 ¼ B2 ¹ B3 þ (k9 ¹ 1)A1 ¹ A3 þ 2A5 ,
using Eshelby’s method31, Yu and Sanday23 showed that the
Galerkin vectors due to a homogeneous inclusion with c2 9 ¼ B 1 ¹ A 2 ¹ A 1 þ A 5 ð22Þ
eigenstrain are
Substituting eqns (9) and (11) into eqn (22) gives
Z  
m n
G¼ eTjk gjk þ eTmm gnn dQ (12) c1 ¼ {(k ¹ 2)[(m ¹ mT )(mN þ k9m) þ (m ¹ mN )(mT þ k9m)]
4p(1 ¹ n) Q 1 ¹ 2n
þ (k þ 1)(mN ¹ mT )m}A
and
c2 ¼ 2[(m ¹ mT )(mN þ k9m) þ (m ¹ mN )(mT þ k9m)]A
Z  
m n
G9 ¼ eTjk gjk 9 þ eTmm gnn 9 dQ (13)
4p(1 ¹ n) Q 1 ¹ 2n c1 9 ¼ 2(k þ 1)[mN (mN þ k9m) þ (mN ¹ mT )m]A

1060
 Dislocation-like model for imperfect interfaces: H. Y. Yu

c2 9 ¼ 2(k þ 1)(mT ¹ mN )m and the disclination problems. One is to formulate the defect
theory with a continuous distribution of infinitesimal defect
The following useful relationships between Galerkin vec- loop densities. This could be regarded as one of the simplest
tors, which lead to the same elastic field, were used to obtain approaches, because the loop densities can be arbitrarily
eqns (20) and (21) from eqns (8) and (10): prescribed. Furthermore, any given defect can be built up
=F ¼ 0 when =2 F ¼ 0 from some loop distribution. Generally, the dislocation
problem is a three-dimensional problem. However, if the
=R1 ¼ ¹ (1 ¹ k9)w1 x3 when x3 # 0 surface of the cut is a half-plane, then the defect is a straight
line dislocation or disclination and the problem becomes
=R, ¼ ( ¹ 1), (1 ¹ k)w, x3 when x3 $ 0 two-dimensional.
Consider an infinitesimal Volterra dislocation loop at
{[(x1 ¹ xp1 )w, ], 1 þ [(x2 ¹ xp2 )w, ], 2 }x3 ¼ [2w, ¹ ( ¹ 1), R,, 3 ]x3 point (xp1 , xp2 , xp3 ), with the surface of the cut formally used to
generate the dislocation loop being dS i. The displacement
where , ¼ 1, 2. The Galerkin vectors in solid I and II for a vector d i which generates the defect has components
center of dilatation are di ¼ bi þ «imn qm (xpn ¹ xn 0) (30)
1 1
gc ¼ gnn and gc 9 g 9 (25) where b i is the Burger’s vector of the dislocation, q m is the
1¹k 1 ¹ k nm Frank vector of the disclination, and « imn is the permutation
respectively. Substituting eqns (18) and (19) into eqn (5), symbol. The disclination axis passes through the point
the elastic displacements due to an inclusion with pure dila- (x1 0, x2 0, x3 0). By using Volterra’s equation32,33, the Galer-
tational eigenstrain are kin vectors at (x 1,x 2,x 3) for the infinitesimal dislocation loop
(1 þ n)« is28–30
ui ¼ ¹ {[(1 ¹ k)F1, i þ (c1 þ c2 )F2, i þ c2 (x3 F2, 3 ), i ] Z 
(1 ¹ k2 )p m 2n
G¼ g þ gkj þ g d d dS (31)
¹ (1 þ k)c2 F2, 3 di3 } ð26Þ 8p(1 ¹ n) S jk 1 ¹ 2n nn jk j k

and for x 3 $ 0 and

Z 
(1 þ n)m« m 2n
ui 9 ¼ ¹ {[(c1 9 ¹ c2 9)F1, i ¹ c2 9(x3 F1, 3 ), i ] G9 ¼ g9jk þ g9kj þ g9 d d dS (32)
1 ¹ 2n nn jk j k
(1 ¹ k2 )pm9 8p(1 ¹ n) S

þ ( þ k9)c2 9F1, 3 d3i } for x 3 # 0.

for x 3 $ 0 and x 3 # 0, respectively, where i ¼ 1, 2, 3.
Z by the FS/RH convention) is obtained by letting q m ¼ 0 in
F, ¼ J, dQ (28)
Q
is the Newtonian potential due to the inclusion Q with unit
mass density when , ¼ 1 and it is the Newtonian potential
due to the mirror image of the inclusion when , ¼ 2. The
Newtonian potential is well known for many different inclu-
sion shapes. The stresses in the matrix are obtained by sub-
stituting eqns (26) and (27) into eqns (6) and (7),
respectively. The stress inside the inclusion is
jQij ¼ jij ¹ jTij
where jTij
is the uniform stress derived from the eigenstrain
eTij by using Hooke’s law and j ij is the stress in the matrix x 3
$ 0.
DISLOCATIONS
There are two types of Volterra dislocations in the theory of
elasticity. A dislocation is a Volterra dislocation if the two
faces of the cut formally used to generate the dislocation
displace parallel to each other by a translational vector
known as the Burgers vector. A disclination is a Volterra
dislocation if the two faces of the cut rotate with respect to
each other by a rotational vector known as the Frank’s
vector. There are several ways to deal with the dislocation
The elastic field due to a dislocation (line or loop) with
line vector x i and Burgers vector b i (whose sign is defined
eqn (30) and integrating eqns (31) and (32) over the surface
of the cut that generates the dislocation. The surface is a
closed surface for a dislocation loop and is a half-plane for a
straight dislocation. For example, the cut surface of a
straight screw dislocation is a half-plane bounded by a line
parallel to b i, and the cut surface for a straight edge
dislocation is a half-plane bounded by a line perpendicular
to b i34. For straight edge dislocations, the opposite faces of
the cut can move relative to one another in the direction
(29) either parallel or normal to the plane, therefore, one can
choose different cut surfaces and different relative motions
to create the same edge dislocation line35 and this provides
the means to double check the results. The only task
involved in obtaining the elastic solution is simply to find
the appropriate potentials for these planes with unit mass
density. One example will serve to illustrate this approach.
For a screw dislocation at point (0,0,0) with Burgers
vector d j ¼ b 2 in eqn (30), and dislocation line vector y ¼
(0,1,0), let the surface of cut that generates this screw
dislocation be the positive x 1 –x 2 half-plane. Integrating
eqns (31) and (32) (for j ¼ 2 and k ¼ 3) over dS 3 ¼ dx 1*dx 2*
from x 1* ¼ 0 to ` and from x 2* ¼ ¹ ` to ` and substituting
into eqn (5), gives
 
b2 m ¹ mT
u2 ¼ ¹ H ¹ H u1 ¼ u 3 ¼ 0 (33)
4p 1, 3 m þ mT 2, 3

1061
Dislocation-like model for imperfect interfaces: H. Y. Yu
and
mmT b2
u2 9 ¼ ¹ H u 9 ¼ u3 9 ¼ 0 (34)
2pm9(m þ mT ) 1, 3 1
where
Z` Z`
z 11.
H, ¼ dxp1 J, dxp2 ¼ 2z, tan ¹ 1 , ¹ x1 log(x21 þ z2, ) þ 2x1
0 ¹` x1
(35)
are the Newtonian potentials due to the positive x 1 –x 2 half-
plane and its mirror image half-plane with unit surface mass
density for , ¼ 1 and 2, respectively.
SUMMARY
A new model has been proposed to describe an imperfect
interface. The boundary conditions are that the interfacial
tractions are continuous but the interfacial displacements
are discontinuous. The displacements at one side of the
interface are linearly proportional to the displacements at
the other side where the elastic singularity is located. The
proportionality constants are h T for the tangential interfacial
displacement and h N for the radial interfacial displacement.
The results show that the effect of the imperfect interface is
equivalent to introducing two effective interfacial moduli
h Tm9 and h Nm9 in the calculation of the elastic displacements
in both solids. The methods for obtaining the elastic solution
due to defects have been presented and examples have been
given for the inclusion and the dislocation problems.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The support of the Air Force Office of Scientific Research
and the Office of Naval Research for this investigation is
gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
1. Van der Merwe, J.H., On the structure of epitaxial bicrystals. Proc.
Roy. Soc. Lond., 1950, A63, 616–637.
2. Van der Merwe, J.H., Crystal interfaces. Part I. Semi-infinite crys-
tals. J. Appl. Phys., 1963, 34, 117–122.
3. Peierls, R.E., The size of a dislocation. Proc. Phys. Soc., 1940, 52,
34–37.
4. Nabarro, F.R.N., Dislocations in a simple cubic lattice. Proc. Phys.
Soc., 1947, 59, 256–272.
5. Van der Merwe, J.H., in On the Structure of Epitaxial Bicrystals,
Surface and Interfaces I: Chemical and Physical Characteristics,
ed. J.J. Burke, N.J. Reed and V. Weiss. Syracuse University Press,
Syracuse, 1967, pp. 361–381.
6. Broutman, L.J. and Agarwal, B.D., A theoretical study of the effect
of an interfacial layer on the properties of composites. Poly. Sci.
Engng., 1974, 14, 581–588.
7. Theocaris, P.S. and Philippidis, T.P., Theoretical evaluation of the
extent of the mesophase in particulate and fibrous composites. J.
Reinf. Plastic Comp., 1985, 4, 173–185.
8. Maurer, F.H.J., Simha, R. and Jain, R.K., On the elastic moduli of
particulate composites: Interlayer versus molecular model. In
1062
Proceedings 1st International Conference on Composite Interface,
Cleveland, Ohio, 1986, pp. 367–375.
9. Pagano, N.J. and Tandon, G.P., Modeling of imperfect bonding in
fiber reinforced brittle matrix composites. Mech. Mater., 1990, 9,
49–64.
10. Lene, F. and Leguillon, D., Homogenized constitutive law for a
partially cohesive composite material. Int. J. Solids Struct., 1982,
18, 443–458.
Benveniste, Y. and Aboudi, J., A continuum model for fiber re-
inforced materials with debonding. Int. J. Solids Struct., 1984, 20,
935–951.
12. Achenbach, J.D. and Zhu, H., Effect of interface zone on mechan-
ical behavior and failure of fiber-reinforced composites. J. Mech.
Phys. Solids, 1989, 37, 381–393.
13. Hashin, Z., Thermoelastic properties of fiber composites with
imperfect interface. Mech. Mater., 1990, 8, 333–348.
14. Hashin, Z., The spherical inclusion with imperfect interface. J.
Appl. Mech., 1991, 58, 444–449.
15. Jasuik, I., Chen, J. and Thorpe, M.F., Elastic moduli of composites
with sliding inclusions. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 1992, 40, 373–391.
16. Qu, T., The effect of slightly weakened interfaces on the overall
elastic properties of composite materials. Mech. Mater., 1993, 14,
269–281.
17. Yu, H.Y. and Sanday, S.C., Micromechanics in composite materi-
als—Load transfer at weakly bonded interfaces. Paper presented at
Contractors Meeting on Mechanics of Materials and Structural
Mechanics, Air Force Office of Scientific Research, September
26–27, University of Illinois, Chicago, 1994, pp. 200–204.
18. Yu, H.Y. and Sanday, S.C., Centers of dilatation and inclusions with
dilatational eigenstrain in bimaterials with imperfect interfaces. In
Proceedings of Composites ’95: Recent Advances in Japan and
United States, Proc. Japan–U.S. CCM-VII, Kyoto, Japan, 1995,
pp. 191–200.
19. Yan, X.T., Wang, B.S. and Chiang, F.P., Photoelastic analysis of the
stress field along interface in bimaterials with an inclusion. Paper
presented at SEM 1994 Annual Spring Meeting, Baltimore,
Maryland, June 6–8, 1994, p. 289.
20. Mura, T. and Furuhashi, R., The elastic inclusion with a sliding
interface. J. Appl. Mech., 1984, 51, 308–310.
21. Mindlin, R.D., Force at a point in the interior of a semi-infinite solid.
Physics, 1936, 7, 195–202.
22. Yu, H.Y. and Sanday, S.C., Elastic fields in joined half-spaces due
to nuclei of strain. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond., 1991, A434, 503–519.
23. Yu, H.Y. and Sanday, S.C., Elastic fields in joined semi-infinite
solids with an inclusion. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond., 1991, A434,
521–530.
24. Yu, H.Y. and Sanday, S.C., Elastic inhomogeneous inclusions and
inhomogeneities in bimaterials. Proc. Roy. Soc., 1992, A439, 659–667.
25. Yu, H.Y., Sanday, S.C. and Rath, B.B., Thermoelastic stresses in
bimaterials. Phil. Mag., 1992, A65, 1049–1064.
26. Yu, H.Y. and Sanday, S.C., Elastic field in a plane-layered elastic
solid due to centers of dilatation and thermal inhomogeneities. J.
Mech. Phys. Solids, 1993, 41, 267–296.
27. Yu, H.Y., Sanday, S.C. and Bacon, D.J., Elastic force on a point
defect in or near a surface layer. J. Appl. Mech., 1996, 63, 1042–
1045.
28. Yu, H.Y. and Sanday, S.C., Dislocations in bimaterials. Phil. Mag.,
1991, A64, 1225–1237.
29. Yu, H.Y. and Sanday, S.C., Circular dislocation loops in bimater-
ials. J. Phys.: Condensed Matter, 1991, 3, 3081–3090.
30. Yu, H.Y. and Sanday, S.C., Disclinations in bimaterials. Phys. Stat.
Solidi (a), 1991, 126, 355–365.
31. Eshelby, J.D., Elastic inclusions and inhomogeneities. In Progress
in Solid Mechanics, Vol. 2, ed. I.N. Sneddon and R. Hill. North-
Holland, Amsterdam, 1961, pp. 89–140.
32. Volterra, V., Sur I’équilibre des carps élastiques multiplement con-
nexes. Annal. Sci. de L’École Norm. Super., Paris, 1907, 24, 401–517.
33. Bacon, D.J. and Groves, P.P., The dislocation in a semi-infinite
isotropic medium. In Proceedings Washington Conference on Fun-
damental Aspects of Dislocation Theory, National Bureau of Stan-
dards, MD, 1969, pp. 35–45.
34. Nabarro, F.R.N., The synthesis of elastic dislocation fields. Phil.
Mag., 1951, 42, 1224–1231.
35. Hirth, J.P. and Lothe, L., Theory of Dislocations. Wiley, New York,
1968.