Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of finite element solutions with analytical and experimental data for elastic-plastic cracked problems

  • Published:
International Journal of Fracture Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Non-linear finite element results from a round robin are compared with empirical and experimental data obtained for three types of geometries: compact specimen, three-point bend specimen and a center-cracked panel subject to uniaxial loading. The solution parameters to be compared in various forms are: applied load, clip gauge displacement, RiceJ-integral (with no limit placed on method of calculation),K 1 crack opening profiles and plastic zone development.

Résumé

Les résultats d'éléments finis non linéaires résultant d'une consultation circulaire sont comparés avec des données empiriques et expérimentales obtenues pour trois types de géométrie: éprouvette compacte, éprouvette de flexion en trois points et panneau à fissure centrale soumis à une charge uniaxiale. Les paramètres de la solution qui doivent être comparés dans les différentes formes sont: la charge appliquée, le déplacement d'un extensiomètre, l'intégraleJ (sans réserve sur sa méthode de calcul), KI, les profils d'ouverture de fissure ainsi que le développement de la zone plastique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. W.K. Wilson and J.R. Osias,International Journal of Fracture 14 (1978) R98-R109.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J.G. Merkle and H.T. Corten,Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 96 (1974) 286–292.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J.R. Rice,Journal of Applied Mechanics 35 (1968) 379–386.

    Google Scholar 

  4. J.R. Rice, inFracture and Advanced Treatise, Ed. H. Liebowitz, Volume II (1968) 191–311.

  5. D.M. Parks inProceedings of the First International Conference of Numerical Methods in Fracture Mechanics Swansea University, U.K. (1978) 464–478.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J.D.G. Sumpter and C.E. Turner, inCracks and Fracture, ASTM STP 601 (1976) 3–18.

  7. Standard Method of Test For Plane Strain Fracture Toughness of Metallic Materials. ASTM E-74 (1974).

  8. F.J. Bradshaw and C. Wheeler, “The Crack Resistance of Some Aluminium Alloys and the Prediction of Thin Section Failure”, Report 73191, Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnbourgh, England (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  9. R.S. Barsoum,International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 10 (1976) 25–37.

    Google Scholar 

  10. M. Shiratori and T. Miyoshi, inProceedings of the Second International Conference of Numerical Methods in Fracture Mechanics Pineridge Press, Swansea, U.K. (1980) 417–431.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J.E. Srawley and B. Gross,Engineering Fracture Mechanics 4 (1972) 587–589.

    Google Scholar 

  12. J.R. Haigh and C.E. Richards, Report RD/L/M 461, Central Electricity Generating Board, U.K. (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  13. G. Irwin,Journal of Applied Mechanics 24 (1957) 361–364.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D.P. Rooke and D.J. Cartwright, inCompendium of Stress Intensity Factors (1976) 84.

  15. W.T. Evans, M.F. Light and A.R. Luxmoore,Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 28 (1980) 167–189.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bleackley, M.H., Luxmoore, A.R. Comparison of finite element solutions with analytical and experimental data for elastic-plastic cracked problems. Int J Fract 22, 15–39 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00960097

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00960097

Keywords

Navigation