International Journal of Fracture

, Volume 202, Issue 1, pp 1–19

On determining mixed-mode traction–separation relations for interfaces

  • Chenglin Wu
  • Shravan Gowrishankar
  • Rui Huang
  • Kenneth M. Liechti
Original Paper
  • 566 Downloads

Abstract

Traction–separation relations can be used to represent the adhesive interactions of a bimaterial interface during fracture. In this paper, a direct method is proposed to determine mixed-mode traction–separation relations based on a combination of global and local measurements including load-displacement, crack extension, crack tip opening displacement, and fracture resistance curves. Mixed-mode interfacial fracture experiments were conducted using the end loaded split (ELS) configuration for a silicon-epoxy interface, where the epoxy thickness was used to control the phase angle of the fracture mode-mix. Infra-red crack opening interferometry was used to measure the normal crack opening displacements, while both normal and shear components of the crack-tip opening displacements were obtained by digital image correlation. For the resistance curves, an approximate value of the J-integral was calculated based on a beam-on-elastic-foundation model that referenced the measured load-displacement data. A damage-based cohesive zone model with mixed-mode traction–separation relations was then adopted in finite element analyses, with the interfacial properties determined directly from the experiments. With the mode-I fracture toughness from a previous study, the model was used to predict mixed-mode fracture of the silicon/epoxy interfaces for phase angles ranging from \(-42^{\circ }\) to \(0^{\circ }\). Results from experiments using ELS specimens with phase angles that differed from those employed in parameter extraction were used to validate the model. Additional measurements would be necessary to further extend the reach of the model to mode-II dominant conditions.

Keywords

Mixed-mode fracture Crack opening interferometry Digital image correlation Traction–separation relations Interfaces 

References

  1. Barenblatt GI (1962) The mathematical theory of equilibrium cracks in brittle fracture. Adv Appl Mech 7:55–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cao HC, Evans AG (1989) An experimental study of the fracture resistance of bimaterial interfaces. Mech Mater 7:295–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cao Z, Tao L, Akinwande D, Huang R, Liechti KM (2015) Mixed-mode interactions between graphene and substrates by blister tests. J Appl Mech 82:081008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cao Z, Tao L, Akinwande D, Huang R, Liechti KM (2016) Mixed-mode traction–separation relations between graphene and copper by blister tests. Int J Solids Struct 84:147–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cao Z, Wang P, Gao W, Tao L, Suk JW, Ruoff RS, Akinwande D, Huang R, Liechti KM (2014) A blister test for interfacial adhesion of large-scale transferred graphene. Carbon 69:390–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chai H (1988) Shear Fracture. Int J Fract 37:137–159Google Scholar
  7. Chai H (1990) Interlaminar shear fracture of laminated composites. Int J Fract 43:117–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chai YS, Liechti KM (1992) Asymmetric shielding in interfacial fracture under in-plane shear. J Appl Mech 59:295–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dugdale DS (1960) Yielding of steel sheets ccontaining slits. J Mech Phys Solids 8:100–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feraren P, Jensen HM (2004) Cohesive zone modelling of interface fracture near flaws in adhesive joints. Eng Fract Mech 71:2125–2142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gowrishankar S (2014) Characterization of delamination in silicon epoxy systems. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Texas, AustinGoogle Scholar
  12. Gowrishankar S, Mei HX, Liechti KM, Huang R (2012) A comparison of direct and iterative methods for determining traction–separation relations. Int J Fract 177:109–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ho PS, Wang G, Ding M, Zhao J-H, Dai X (2004) Reliability issues for flip-chip packages. Microelectron Reliab 44:719–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hutchinson JW, Suo Z (1992) Mixed mode cracking in layered materials. Adv Appl Mech 29:63–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Li S, Thouless MD (2006) Mixed-mode cohesive-zone models for fracture of an adhesively bonded polymer matrix composite. Eng Fract Mech 73:64–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li S, Thouless MD, Waas AM, Schroeder JA, Zavattieri PD (2005) Use of a cohesive-zone model to analyze the fracture of a fiber-reinforced polymer-matrix composite. Compos Sci Technol 65:537–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li S, Wang J, Thouless MD (2004) The effects of shear on delamination in layered materials. J Mech Phys Solids 52:193–214Google Scholar
  18. Liang YM, Liechti KM (1995) Toughening mechanisms in mixed-mode interfacial fracture. Int J Solids Struct 32:957–978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liechti KM (1993) On the use of classical interferometry techniques in fracture mechanics. VCH Publishers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Liechti KM, Hanson E (1988) Nonlinear effects in mixed-mode delaminations. Int J Fract 36:199–217Google Scholar
  21. Liechti KM, Knauss WG (1982) Crack propagation at material interfaces: I. Experimental technique to determine crack profiles. Exp Mech 22:262–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu X, Lane M, Shaw T, Simonyi E (2007) Delamination in patterned films. Int J Solids Struct 44:1706–1718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mello AV, Liechti KM (2006) The effect of self-assembled monolayers on interfacial fracture. J Appl Mech 73:860–870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mohammed I, Liechti KM (2000) Cohesive zone modeling of crack nucleation at bimaterial corners. J Mech Phys Solids 48:735–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Moroni F, Pirondi A (2011) Cohesive zone model simulation of fatigue debonding along interfaces. Proc Eng 10:1829–1834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Na SR, Suk JW, Ruoff RS, Huang R, Liechti KM (2014) Ultra long-range interactions between large area graphene and silicon. ACS Nano 8:11234–11242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Needleman A (1987) A continuum model for void nucleation by inclusion debonding. J Appl Mech 54:525–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Needleman A (1990) An analysis of tensile decohesion along an interface. J Mech Phys Solids 38:289–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Parmigiani JP, Thouless MD (2007) The effects of cohesive strength and toughness on mixed-mode delamination of beam-like geometries. Eng Fract Mech 74:2675–2699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rice JR (1968) A path independent integral and the approximate analysis of strain concentrations by notches and cracks. J Appl Mech 35:379–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rice JR (1988) Elastic fracture mechanics concepts for interfacial cracks. J Appl Mech 55:98–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shirani A, Liechti KM (1998) A calibrated fracture process zone model for thin film blistering. Int J Fract 93:281–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sorensen BF, Jacobsen TK (2003) Determination of cohesive laws by the J integral approach. Eng Fract Mech 70:1841–1858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Suo Z, Hutchinson JW (1989) Sandwich test specimens for measuring interface crack toughness. Mater Sci Eng A A107:135–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Swadener JG, Liechti KM (1998) Asymmetric shielding mechanisms in the mixed-mode fracture of a glass/epoxy interface. J Appl Mech 65:25–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Swadener JG, Liechti KM, de Lozanne AL (1999) The intrinsic toughness and adhesion mechanism of a glass/epoxy interface. J Mech Phys Solids 47:223–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ungsuwarungsri T, Knauss WG (1987) The role of damage-softened material behavior in the fracture of composites and adhesives. Int J Fract 35:221–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Valoroso N, Champaney L (2006) A damage-mechanics-based approach for modelling decohesion in adhesively bonded assemblies. Eng Fract Mech 73:2774–2801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang H, Vu-Khanh T (1996) Use of end-loaded-split (ELS) test to study stable fracture behaviour of composites under mode II loading. Compos Struct 36:71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wang JS, Suo Z (1990) Experimental-determination of interfacial toughness curves using Brazil-nut-sandwiches. Acta Metall Mater 38:1279–1290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Xu G, Liechti K (2010) Bulge testing transparent thin films with moiré deflectometry. Exp Mech 50:217–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhang X, Im SH, Huang R, Ho PS (2008) Chip-packaging interaction and reliability impact on Cu/Low-k interconnects. Integrated Interconnect Technologies for 3D Nanoelectronic Systems, Artech House, Norwood, pp 23–59Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chenglin Wu
    • 1
  • Shravan Gowrishankar
    • 2
    • 3
  • Rui Huang
    • 1
  • Kenneth M. Liechti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering MechanicsUniversity of TexasAustinUSA
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Materials Science and Engineering ProgramUniversity of TexasAustinUSA
  3. 3.Intel Inc.PortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations