Experimental Mechanics

, Volume 44, Issue 5, pp 522–532 | Cite as

A method for measuring mode I crack tip constraint under static and dynamic loading conditions

  • M. J. Maleski
  • M. S. Kirugulige
  • H. V. Tippur
Article

Abstract

A novel experimental technique for measuring crack tipT-stress, and hence in-plane crack tip constraint, in elastic materials has been developed. The method exploits optimal positioning of stacked strain gage rosette near a mode I crack tip such that the influence of dominant singular strains is negated in order to determineT-stress accurately. The method is demonstrated for quasi-static and low-velocity impact loading conditions and two values of crack length to plate width ratios (a/W). By coupling this new method with the Dally-Sanford single strain gage method for measuring the mode I stress intensity factorKI, the crack tip biaxiality parameter\(\beta = T\sqrt {{{\pi a} \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {{\pi a} K}} \right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace} K}} \) is also measured experimentally. Complementary small strain, static and dynamic finite element simulations are carried out under plane stress conditions. Time histories ofKI andT-stress are computed by regression analysis of the displacement and stress fields, respectively. The experimental results are in good agreement with those obtained from numerical simulations. Preliminary data for critical values ofKI and β for dynamic experiments involving epoxy specimens are reported. Dynamic crack initiation toughness shows an increasing trend as β becomes more negative at higher impact velocities.

Key Words

Dynamic fracture constraint biaxilality T-stress strain gages finite elements 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Richardson, D.E. andGoree, J.G., “Experimental Verification of a New Two-parameter Fracture Model,”ASTM-STP, Vol. 1189, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 738–750 (1993).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chao, Y.J., Liu, S., andBroviak, B.J., “Brittle Fracture: Variation of Fracture Toughness with Constraint and Crack Curving Under Mode I Conditions,” EXPERIMENTAL MECHANICS,41 (3),232–241 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Irwin, G.R., “Discussion of the Dynamic Stress Distribution Surrounding a Running Crack—A Photoelastic Analysis,”Proceedings of the Society of Experimental Stress Analysis,16, (1),93–96 (1957).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kirk, M.T., Koppenhoefer, K.C., andShih, C.F., “Effect of Constraint on Specimen Dimensions Needed to Obtain Structurally Relevant Toughness Measures,”Constraint Effects in Fracture, ASTM-STP, Vol. 1171, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 79–103 (1993).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Koppenhoefer, K.C. andDodds, R.H., “Constraint Effects on Fracture Toughness of Impact-loaded, Pre-cracked Charpy Specimens,”Journal of Nuclear Engineering and Design,162 (2–3),145–158 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jayadevan, K., Narasimhan, R., Ramamurthy, T., andDattaguru, B., “A Numerical Study in Dynamically Loaded Fracture Specimens,”International Journal of Solids and Structures,38,4987–5005 (2001).CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sanford, R.J., Principles of Fracture Mechanics, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (2002).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chona, R., Irwin, G.R., andSanford, R.J., “Influence of Specimen Size and Shape on the Singularity-dominated Zone,” Fracture Mechanics 14th Symposium, Vol. 1: Theory and Analysis, ASTM-STP, Vol. 791, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 492–502 (1983).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tippur, H.V., Krishnaswamy, S., andRosakis, A.J., “Optical Mapping of Crack Tip Deformations Using the Methods of Transmission and Reflection Coherent Gradient Sensing: A Study of Crack Tip K-dominance,”International Journal of Fracture,52,91–117 (1991).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ramulu, M. andKobayashi, A.S., “Mechanics of Crack Curving and Branching—A Dynamic Fracture Analysis,” EXPERIMENTAL MECHANICS,27,187–201 (1985).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sumter, J.D.G., “An Experimental Investigation of the T-stress Approach: Constraint Effects in Fracture,“ASTM-STP, Vol. 1171, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 492–502 (1993).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Larsson, S.G. andCarlsson, A.J., “Influence of Non-singular Stress Terms on Small Scale Yielding at Crack Tips in Elastic-plastic Materials,”Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids,21,263–277 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rice, J.R., “Limitations to the Small-scale Yielding Approximations for Crack Tip Plasticity,”Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids,22,17–26 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kfouri, A.P., “Some Evaluations of the Elastic T-term using Eshelby’s method,”International Journal of Fracture,30,301–315 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nakamura, T. andParks, D.M., “Determination of Elastic T-stress along Three-dimensional Crack Fronts Using Interaction Integral,”International Journal of Solids and Structures,29,1597–1611 (1992).CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sladek, J., Sladek, V., andFedelinski, P., “Integral Formulation for Elastodynamic T-stresses,”International Journal of Fracture,84,103–116 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yang, B. andRavi-Chandar, K., “Evaluation of Elastic T-stress by Stress Difference Method,”Engineering Fracture Mechanics,64,589–601 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dally, J.W. andSanford, R.J., “Strain Gage Methods for Measuring the Opening-mode Stress Intensity Factor, K 1,” EXPERIMENTAL MECHANICS,49,381–388 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dally, J.W. andSanford, R.J., “Measuring the Stress Intensity Factor for Propagating Cracks with Strain Gages,”Journal of Testing and Evaluation,18 (4),240–249 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Westergaard, H.M., “Bearing Pressure and Cracks,” ASME Journal of Applied mechanics,6 (1939).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Williams, M.L., “On the Stress Distribution at the Base of a Stationary Crack,”Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids,24,109–114 (1957).MATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rosakis, A.J. andRavi-Chandar, K., “On Crack-tip Stress State: An Experimental Evaluation of Three-dimensional Effects,”International Journal of Solids and Structures,22,121–138 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rousseau, C.E. andTippur, H.V., “Dynamic Failure of Compositionally Graded Materials with Cracks Along the Elastic Gradient: Experiments and Analysis,”Mechanics of Materials,33,403–421 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Anderson, T.L., Fracture Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications, 2nd edition, CRC Press, New York (1994).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    O’Dowd, N.P. andShih, C.F., “Two Parameter Fracture Mechanics: Theory and Applications,”ASTM-STP, Vol. 1207, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 21–47 (1994).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Experimental Mechanics 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. J. Maleski
    • 1
  • M. S. Kirugulige
    • 1
  • H. V. Tippur
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringAuburn UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations