1/22/2014

1
5.CrackTipStressAnalysis
ME559
Introduction to Fracture Mechanics
p y
Prof.M.Ramulu
M. Ramulu 1
Outline
PlaneProblem&AirysStressFunctions
ModesofFracture
CrackTipStress&Displacementfields
Westergaard
M kh li h ili Muskhelishvili
Williams
StressIntensityFactor,K
RelationbetweenG&K
Summary
M. Ramulu 2
CrackTipStressAnalysis
Fracturemechanicsisbasedontheassumptionthatall
engineeringmaterialscontaincracksfromwhichfailure
starts.
Requireknowledgeoftheredistributionofstresscaused
bythecracksinconjunctionwithcrackgrowthcondition.
L di f k d b d i ll i d b Loadingofacrackedbodyisusuallyaccompaniedby
inelasticdeformation&othernonlineareffectsnearthe
cracktip,exceptideallybrittlematerials.Assumethese
effectsaresmallcomparedtocracksize.Thereforelinear
theoryismorethanadequatetoaddressstress
distributioninthecrackbody.
M. Ramulu 3
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
StressFunctionApproach
AValidstressfunctionisonethatsatisfies
boththeequilibriumandthecompatibility
conditions.
TheAiryStressFunctionautomaticallysatisfies
theseconditions.
Tosatisfyarealproblem,theboundary
conditionsmustmatchtheproblem.
M. Ramulu 4
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
StressFunctionApproach
Planeproblem
Planestress:
o
x
=o
x
(x,y),o
y
=o
y
(x,y),t
xy
=(x,y)o
z
=t
xz
=t
yz
=0
Triaxial strains. Triaxialstrains.
Planestrain:
u=u(x,y),v=v(x,y),w=0
c
z
=
xz
=
yz
=0; o
z
=v(o
x
+o
y
)
Triaxialstresses.
M. Ramulu 5
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
StressFunctionApproach
Linearelasticityfieldequation
1)Equilibriumequationsforplaneproblem.
2)Straindisplacementrelations.
M. Ramulu 6
1/22/2014
2
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
StressFunction
3)Stressstrainrelations(Hookslaw).
4)Compatibilityequations.
Combiningtheaboveleadtothecompatibilityequations:
M. Ramulu 7
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
Airys StressFunction
Fora2Delasticproblemthereexistsafunction
u(x,y)fromwhichthestressescanbederived.
Theequilibriumandcompatibilityequationsare q p y q
automaticallysatisfiedifu(x,y) hasthe
biharmonicproperty
Thefunction u iscalledtheAirystressfunction
M. Ramulu 8
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
Airys StressFunction
Airys stressfunction,u (orU)
Where+
1
,+
2
,+
3
areharmonicfunctions.
Airys stressfunction,u orU;
satisfiedV
2
V
2
u =0(Biharmonic equation).
Thisimpliesthattheequilibriumandcompatibility
equationsareautomaticallysatisfied.
M. Ramulu 9
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
Airys StressFunction
InpolarCoordinate;
M. Ramulu 10
2DCrackProblems
StressFunctions:
Westergaard(1939)
Williams(1952,1957)
Muskhelishvili (1953) Muskhelishvili(1953)
TheyallusedAirysstressfunction.
M. Ramulu 11
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
Westergaards StressFunction
WestergaardstressfunctionZ(z)expressedin
complexvariableform.
Z( ) i d i d i i th k ti t Z(z)isusedinderivingthecracktipstresses
TheWestergaardstressfunctionisrelatedto
Airystressfunctionasfollows
M. Ramulu 12
1/22/2014
3
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
Westergaards StressFunction
M. Ramulu 13
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
Westergaards StressFunction
M. Ramulu 14
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
Westergaards StressFunction
Stresses in terms of the Z(z) are
M. Ramulu 15
Using these stresses and a polar coordinate
system at the crack tip, the elastic stresses at
the crack tip can be derived.
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
BasicModesofFracture
The three Modes of loading cracks are:
Mode I: Opening
Mode II: In-Plane Shear
Mode III: O t of Plane Shear
M. Ramulu 16
Mode III: Out-of-Plane Shear
Opening Mode is the predominant mode of
fracture in real engineering problems
In-plane Mode is also called sliding mode
Out-of-plane Mode is also called tearing mode
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
CRACKTRIPSTRESSANDDISPLACEMENTFIELDS
z
p
y
o
u
r
x
z
p
y
o
u
r
x
z
p
y
o
u
r
x
M. Ramulu 17
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIcrackproblem
y
o
r
u
M. Ramulu 18
x
2a
o
1/22/2014
4
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIcrackproblem
oxx
oyy
oxy
iy
M. Ramulu 19
oxx
x
a a
u
r
Z=x+iy

u
= re
i
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIcrackproblem
M. Ramulu 20
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIcrackproblem
-
M. Ramulu 21
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIcrackproblem
M. Ramulu 22
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIcrackproblem
M. Ramulu 23
CrackTipStressAnalysis:ModeIcrack
problem(stressIntensityFactor,K
I
)
Mode I stress intensity factor, K
I
Stress analysis of a component containing crack(s)
reduces to determination of K
I
at the tip of the crack(s).
K
I
has units of psi (in)
0.5
or MPa (m)
0.5
.
C i f K i (i )
0 5
1 0989* MP ( )
0 5
M. Ramulu 24
Conversion factor: Ksi (in)
0.5
= 1.0989* MPa (m)
0.5
The difference between one cracked component and
another lies in the magnitude of the stress field
parameter K
I
. Higher K indicates higher stress field.
In essence, K
I
serves as a scale factor to define the
magnitude of the crack tip stress field.
1/22/2014
5
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeICrackTipElasticStressDistribution
K
I
characterizes the magnitude (intensity) of
the stresses in the vicinity of an ideally sharp
crack tip in linear-elastic and isotropic
material.
M. Ramulu 25
K
I
is a measure for the stress singularity at the
crack tip.
These equations are based on the theory of
linear elasticity.
They describe the stress field near the crack tip.
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIcrackproblem
strain plane and stress plane
for different is and modulus shear is
2
cos 2 1
2
sin
2 2
2
sin 2 1
2
cos
2 2
2
2
k
u
k
u
t
u
k
u
t
Where
r K
v
r K
u
I
I
(

|
.
|

\
|
+ |
.
|

\
|
=
(

|
.
|

\
|
+ |
.
|

\
|
=
M. Ramulu 26
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIcrackproblem
M. Ramulu 27
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIIcrackproblem
iy
tXY
r
u
M. Ramulu 28
x
2a
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIIcrackproblem
M. Ramulu 29
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIIIcrackproblem
M. Ramulu 30
2a
1/22/2014
6
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIIIcrackproblem
M. Ramulu 31
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
ModeIIIcrackproblem
M. Ramulu 32
Muskhelishvilisstressfunction
(1953)
Suitableforsolvingboundaryvalueproblem.
Utilizeconformalmappingtechnique.
Muskhelishvilisstressfunctionconsistsoftwoanalytic
functionsu(z)andX(z)whichareselectedtoAirysstress
function |(x,y), through function|(x,y),through
M. Ramulu 33
Muskhelishvilisstressfunction
(1953)
M. Ramulu 34
Williams(1952,1957)
Using semi-inverse method Williams assumed an Airy
stress function in polar coordinates of the form
Where the value(s) of
are to be determined
o
o
y
M. Ramulu 35
as part of the solution.
With this choice of
stress function, the
stresses can be
expressed in polar
coordinates
A Wedge of apex angle 2o with
traction-free flanks.
CrackTipStressAnalysis:
Airys StressFunction
Stressesinpolar
Coordinate;
M. Ramulu 36
0
1 1 1 1
2
2
2 2
2
2
2
2 2
2
2 2 4
= u
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
+
c
c
+
c
c
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
+
c
c
+
c
c
= u V V = u V
u u r r r r r r r r
Biharmonic Equation is :
1/22/2014
7
Williams(1952,1957)
Boundary Conditions:
Substituting the assumed airy stress function into
o
o
y
M. Ramulu 37
the biharmonic equation ( ) yields:
Result in an ordinary differential equation and the
general solution for f(u)
u V
4
Williams(1952,1957)
The constants C
1
, C
2
, C
3
, and C
4
are to be determined from
the boundary conditions on the faces of the wedge. Using
the boundary conditions in f(u) and its derivative :
M. Ramulu 38
Williams(1952,1957)
The resulting equations, in matrix form
M. Ramulu 39
Therefore,
The resulting eigenequation for the crack problem
Williams(1952,1957)
Let =n/2 and o=t in matrix form yields
M. Ramulu 40
Williams(1952,1957)
General solution in terms of stress function for the
Wedge shaped or single-ended crack with traction-
free faces is:
M. Ramulu 41
Williams(1952,1957)
Crack tip near-field equations
M. Ramulu 42
1/22/2014
8
Displacement Equation
mode I and mode II
M. Ramulu 43
Substituting o
rr
, o
ru
,
,
t
r u
in Hooks law for strains and
integrity them to obtain displacements
DisplacementEquation
modeIandmodeII
Mode I
M. Ramulu 44
DisplacementEquation
modeIandmodeII
Mode II
M. Ramulu 45
Cracktipelasticstressfields
LinearElasticFractureMechanics(LEFM)
FractureModes
WilliamsModeIandIIInfinitePlate
solution
ModeIIIsolution
TruncationofWilliamssolutionto2terms
Introduction of Tstress IntroductionofT stress
_
ox
oy
xy
_ = AIn
n
2
r
n
2
-1
`
1
1
1
1
[2 +(-1)
n
+
n
2
cos [
n
2
-1 0 -[
n
2
-1 cos [
n
2
- S 0
[2 -(-1)
n
-
n
2
cos [
n
2
-1 0 +[
n
2
-1 cos [
n
2
- S 0
-[(-1)
n
+
n
2
sin [
n
2
- 1 0 + [
n
2
- 1 sin [
n
2
-S 0
1
1
1
1
1

n=1
-
AIIn
n
2
r
n
2
-1
`
1
1
1
1
[2 -(-1)
n
+
n
2
sin [
n
2
- 1 0 - [
n
2
- 1 sin [
n
2
- S 0
[2 + (-1)
n
-
n
2
sin[
n
2
-1 0 + [
n
2
- 1 sin [
n
2
- S 0
-[(-1)
n
+
n
2
cos [
n
2
-1 0 - [
n
2
-1 cos [
n
2
- S 0
1
1
1
1
1

n=1

]
xz
yz
=
n
2
Cnr
n
2
-1
_
sin[
n
2
- 1 0
cos [
n
2
-1 0
_

n=1,S,S,
+ Cnr
n
2
-1
_
cos [
n
2
- 1 0
sin [
n
2
- 1 0
_

n=2,4,..

_
ox
oy
xy
_ = AI1r
-
1
2
`
1
1
1
1cos _
0
2
] _1 -sin_
0
2
] sin _
S0
2
]_
cos _
0
2
] _1 +sin _
0
2
] sin _
S0
2
]_
cos _
0
2
] sin _
0
2
] cos _
S0
2
]
1
1
1
1
1
+A12 _
4
u
u
_
- AII1r
-
1
2
`
1
1
1
1sin_
0
2
] _-2 - cos _
0
2
] cos _
S0
2
]_
sin _
0
2
] cos _
0
2
] cos _
S0
2
]
cos _
0
2
] _1 -sin _
0
2
] sin _
S0
2
]_
1
1
1
1
1
-A22 _
u
u
u
_
I = 4A
I2

TheoreticalResults
CracktipStress
fields
T=0
T=+0.5
T=0.5

(a) CartesianstressesinCartesianandPolar coordinates
30 60 90 120 150 180

0.5
1.0
ij 2 r
K1
xy
y
x
T , 0.
0.4 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
1.0
1.0
ij 2 r
K1
1.0

(a) CartesianstressesinCartesianandPolar coordinates

30 60 90 120 150 180

0.5
1.0
ij 2 r
K1
xy
y
x
T , 0.5
0.4 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
1.0
ij 2 r
K1 1.0

(a) CartesianstressesinCartesianandPolar coordinates

30 60 90 120 150 180

0.5
1.0
ij 2 r
K1
xy
y
x
T , 0.5
0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
1.0
ij 2 r
K1
1.0

(b) Polar StressesinCartesianandPolar coordinates


(c) Principal stressesinCartesianandPolar coordinates
30 60 90 120 150 180

0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
r

rr
T , 0.
0.4 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
30 60 90 120 150 180

0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
ij 2 r
K1
3
2
1
T , 0.
0.5 0.5 1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
1.0

(b) Polar StressesinCartesianandPolar coordinates


(c) Principal stressesinCartesianandPolar coordinates
30 60 90 120 150 180

0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
r

rr
T , 0.5
0.5 0.5 1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
30 60 90 120 150 180

0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
ij 2 r
K1
3
2
1
T , 0.5
0.5 0.5 1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
1.0

(b) Polar StressesinCartesianandPolar coordinates


(c) Principal stressesinCartesianandPolar coordinates
30 60 90 120 150 180

0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
r

rr
T , 0.5
0.4 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
30 60 90 120 150 180

0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
ij 2 r
K1
3
2
1
T , 0.5
0.5 0.5 1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
1.0
1/22/2014
9
Crack under Mode III action by torsion
A i l C
y
tyz
y
x
tyz
M. Ramulu 49
Antiplane stress Components
Free
Free
x
u
o r
tuz
trz

y
z
ModeIII closelyrelatedtoTorsion
problem
equation harmonic has 0
2
u
zz
= V
M. Ramulu 50
) ( u let
0
0
. conditions
boundary under sloved be should It
w
zz
z
u
u
t t
o u
u u
g r
u
zz
z
=
(
(

(
=
c
c
= =
=
ModeIII closelyrelatedtoTorsion
problem
M. Ramulu 51
ModeIII closelyselectedto
Torsionproblem
M. Ramulu 52
ModeIII closelyselectedto
Torsionproblem
M. Ramulu 53
Stresses along the extended crack line and
displacements along the crack sides will be of
particular importance. We first rename the
coefficients C
11
, C
21,
and D
1
as follows:
M. Ramulu 54
1/22/2014
10
t
t u
t
u t t
u
2 2
1
) ( u : 0 x For
2
) 0 ( : 0 x For
: 0 y II, Mode
yx
x
K
k
u
x
K
II r
II
r
+
= = = s
= = = >
=

M. Ramulu 55
t
t u
t
u t t
u
2
2
) ( w : 0 x For
2
) 0 ( : 0 x For
: 0 y III, Mode
yz
x K
u
x
K
III
z
III
z

= = = s
= = = >
=

CrackTipStressAnalysis:StressIntensityasa
SimilitudeParameter
Two cracked bodies of different size and shape, but of the same
material with cracks of different size, the crack tip stress field is
given by:
K
i
characterizes the magnitude (intensity) of the stresses in the
vicinity of an ideally sharp crack tip in linear-elastic and isotropic
( ) u
t
o
ij
i
ij
f
r
K
2
=
M. Ramulu 56
vicinity of an ideally sharp crack tip in linear-elastic and isotropic
material. If the stress intensities for the two cases are equal, there
is exact similitude ( ie.,two cracks respond in the same manner).
Because of the similutude argument, any cracked body of this
material will cause fracture at the same value of the stress
intensity.
Restrictions:- Same thickness (plane stress or plane strain)
- No plastic deformation or negligible plastic deformation
(Condition of the crack tip)
RelationBetweenStrainEnergyReleaseRate
andStressIntensityFactor
G
U
a
a
=

lim
A
A
A
0
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) AU F x V x x V x dx
y yy
=

(
= 2
1
2
o
a
Aa
2V
( ) ( )
}
A
= =
=
a
yy
V
G
0
2
lim
180 u u
o
( )
o
t t
u
yy
a
=
= =
0
K
2 r
K
2 x
V
r
= +

(
(
KI
2 2 2
1 2
2
2
t
u
k
u
sin cos
M. Ramulu 57
Aa-x
Closure stress
o
yy
Closure Stress
Displacement
}
A A a a
G
0
0
2
lim
RelationbetweenG&K
| | V
r
= +
K
I
2 2
1
t
k
( )
( ) V
a a a x
=
+
+
K
I
A A
2
1
2
k
at u = t
( )
2 2 t
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
G
a a a
a
a x
x
dx
a
a
=
+ +

}
lim
A
A
A
A
A
0
0
1
4
k
t
K K
I I
( ) = + k

1
8
K
I
2
M. Ramulu 58
G
E
=
'
K
I
2
' =

E
v
E Planestress
E
Planestrain
1
2
where
u u u cos sin 2 and ; sin Let
2
a dx a x A = A =
RelationbetweenG&K
( )
r K
Where V is the crack opening displacement
( )
COD
r
a x
=
+

K
E
I
t
k
o
2
1
4
2 2
M. Ramulu 59
RelationbetweenG&K
G
E
I
I
2
K
=
'
G
II
2
K
Mode-I:
Mode-II:
G
E
II
II
=
'
G
III
III
2
K
=
2
' =

E
v
E Planestress
E
Planestrain
1
2
M. Ramulu 60
ModeII:
Mode-III:
Where
1/22/2014
11
RelationbetweenG&K
K K K +K
I II III Total
= +
( ) K K K +K
I IA IB IC
Total
= +
Same mode of deformation
( ) G G G G
Total
+ = +
I II III
M. Ramulu 61
However,
Summary
Cracktipstressanalysisusingstressfunctionapproach
wasintroduced.
Airysstressfunction
Westergaard
Williams Williams
Muskhelishvili
Cracktipstressstateischaracterizedbyasingle
parametercalledstressintensityfactor,K.EqualK
guaranteessimilitude.
Relationexistsbetweenenergyreleaserateandthe
stressintensityfactorsforallmodesofdeformation
M. Ramulu 62