Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

Contents:

Stress concentration around holes, notches, & cracks

The Griffith energy balance approach

The energy release rate and the R curve

Crack tip stress field and Stress Intensity Factors

Stress Intensity Factor Solutions: Compendium

Relation ship between K and G

Crack tip plasticity & plastic zone size

Crack tip plasticity & plastic zone shapes

Plane stress Vs Plane strain

SIF as a Failure Criterion

Mixed mode fracture criteria

Biaxial loading effects

 During the 1960s and 1970s there was frantic activity in the area of
fracture mechanics research, mainly directed towards aircraft design.
Although the fundamental understanding of the fracture process is still
weak,the goal of reducing fracture in service has been largely achieved.
Research in the field has settled to a more reasonable pace.

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

Stress Concentration Around holes, notches, and Cracks:

The first quantitative evidence for the stress concentration effect
of holes was provided by Inglis (1913) who analysed an elliptical
hole in an infinite plate as shown in the sketch. The maximum
stress at the point A is
a

Ayy 1 2
b

------------ (1)

and the ratio Ayy is the SCF denoted by Kt.

 As the major axis a, increases relative to the minor axis b, the

elliptical hole approaches a sharp notch. For this case; Inglis found it
convenient to rewrite eqn.1 in terms of the radius of curvature

1 2

A
yy

where

----------------- (2)

b2

When a>>b, eqn (2) becomes

Ayy 2

----------------- (3)

Thus eqn. (3) gives a good approximation for the stress concentration
due to a notch with a finite tip radius

Equation (3) predicts an infinite stress at the tip of a sharp crack,

where

= 0. This result caused concern when it was first discovered,

because no real material is capable of with standing infinite stress.

i.e. a material that contains a sharp crack theoretically should fail
upon the application of an infinitesimal load. The paradox of a sharp

crack motivated Griffith (1920) to develop a fracture criterion based

on energy rather than local stress.

 An infinitely sharp crack in a continuum is a mathematical abstraction

that is not relevant to real materials. Metals, for instance, deform
plastically, which causes an initially sharp crack to blunt. In the
absence of plastic deformation, the minimum radius a crack tip can
have is on the order of the atomic radius. i.e., very very small.

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

The Griffith Energy Balance Approach

Consider a plate with a crack of length 2a subject to a stress. (Fig.1)

Assume plane stress conditions prevail. In order for this crack to grow:
sufficient potential energy must be available in the plate to overcome
the surface energy of the material.

Fig.1. Through-thickness crack in an infinite

plate subject to a remote tensile stress. In
practical terms, infinite means that the
width of the plate is >> 2a

 The fracture strength is given by

2E s

f
a

--------------- (1)

where s is the surface energy of the material. Eqn. (1) is valid

only for ideally brittle solids. Griffith obtained good correlation between
Eqn (1). and experimental fracture strength of glass. But, Eqn (1)
severely underestimates the fracture strength of metals.

Irwin (1948) and Orowan (1948) independently modified the Griffith

equation to account for materials that can undergo plastic deformation.

The revised expression is

2 E s p
f

where p is the plastic work per unit area of surface created,

and is typically larger than s .

In an ideally brittle solid, a crack can propagate merely by breaking

atomic bonds s reflects the total energy of broken bonds in a unit area.
When a crack propagates through a hole, however, dislocation occurs in
the vicinity of the crack tips, resulting in additional energy dissipation.

It is possible to generalize the Griffith equation to a account for any type

of energy dissipation.
2E Wf
f
a

where Wf is the fracture energy, which could include plastic,

viscoplastic, or viscoplastic effects.

 The fracture strength can also be influenced by crack meandering and

branching, which increases the surface area (Fig.2)

(a) Ideally brittle material

(b) Quasi-brittle elastic-plastic material

(c) Brittle material with crack meandering

and branching

 The Griffith model in particular eqn. (1). applies only to linear elastic
material behaviour. Thus the global behaviour of the cracked
structure / component must be elastic. Any non-linear effects, such as
plasticity, must be confined to a small region near the crack tip.

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

The Energy Release Rate and the R-Curve

In 1956, Irwin presented an energy approach for fracture that is

equivalent to the Griffith model, except that it is in a form that is more

convenient for engineering analysis.

Irwin defined an energy release rate; G as a measure of the energy

available for an increment of crack extension.

d
G
dA

G signifies the rate of change in potential energy with crack area A.

strain energy workpotential

G is also called the crack extension force or the crack driving force.
The energy release rate for an infinite plate in a plane stress state with a

central crack of length 2a is

2a
G
E
K2
G
E

Note: SIF K a

Crack propagation occurs when G reaches a critical value Gc; where Gc

is a measure of the fracture toughness (resistance to crack growth) of
the material; a material properly independent of crack length, shape or
size of the cracked body etc.

The energy release rate for a double cantilever beam test specimen can
be shown to be
P2 a 2
G
B EI

where

Bh 3
I
12

 Crack extension occurs when G = R, where R denotes the material

resistance to crack extension. Crack growth may be stable or unstable
depending on how G and R, vary with crack extension .
A plot of R v/s Crack extension is called a resistance curve or R-curve.
The corresponding plot of G v/s Crack length is the driving force curve.

Consider a wide plate with a central through crack of initial length 2a

subject to remote tensile stress . The energy release rate G
varies linearly with crack size a.

2a
G
E
Figure 2.10(a) shows the crack driving force Vs crack size and the Rcurve, where the material resistance to crack growth remains constant with
crack extension.

Fig 2.10 Schematic driving force / R curve diagrams.

When the applied remote stress is equal to the 1crack is stable.

Fracture occurs when the stress reaches 2 . The crack extension is unstable
because the driving force increases with crack extension while the

material resistance remains constant.

Figure 2.10(b), illustrates a material with a rising R curve. The crack

extends a small amount when 2 , but cannot grow further unless the
stresses increased. When the applied stress is fixed at 2 , the crack driving
force increases at a slower rate than R. Stable Crack Growth continues as the
stress is increased to .3 Finally, when the applied stress reaches 4,

the crack driving force curve is tangent to the R curve. The plate is
unstable with further crack growth. Because the rate of change in the
crack driving force G exceeds the slope of the R curve.

 The conditions for stable crack growth are G R and

dG dR

da
da

dG dR
The condition for UNSTABLE crack growth is d a d a

A material with a rising R curve cannot be uniquely characterized with a

single fracture toughness value. Fracture occurs when the crack driving

force curve is tangent with the R curve, but this point of tangency
depends on the shape of the crack driving force curve, which in turn
depends on the configuration of the structure/component.

 The R curve for an ideally brittle material is flat.

Ductile fracture in metals results in a rising R curve, because a plastic

zone at the crack tip increases in size as the crack extends.

Ideally, the R curve, as well as other measures of fracture toughness,

should be a property of the material and not depend on the size or
shape of the cracked body. Much of fracture mechanics is predicted on

the assumption that fracture toughness is a material properly.

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

Crack Tip Stress Field & Stress Intensity Factors

For certain cracked body configurations subjected to external forces, it

is possible to derive closed-form equations for the STRESSES in the
body, assuming Linear Elastic material behaviour. Westergaard (1939),
Irwin (1957), Sneddon (1946), and Williams (1957) were among the
first to publish such solutions for the configuration shown in Fig 1.

If we define a polar co-ordinate system(r,) with the origin at the cracktip,

the stress field in the vicinity of the crack tip is

i j

K
r

m
2

f i j A m r g imj ----------------- (1)

m 0

 As r 0 , the leading term approaches infinity, but the other terms

remains finite or approach zero depending on the geometry of the
1

cracked body. Therefore the stress filled near the crack tip varies as
regardless of the geometry of the cracked body: Equation (1) there by
describes stress singularity since stress is asymptotic to r = 0, K is the

strength of this singularity.

r,

 There are three types of LOADING that a crack can experience, as

fig.2.14illustrates. Mode I loading, where the principal load is applied

normal to the crack plane, tends to open the crack faces. Mode II
corresponds to in-plane shear loading and tends to slide one crack

face w.r.t the other. Mode III refers to out-of-plane shear. A crack in
a body can be loaded in any one of these modes, or a combination of
two or three modes.

Fig 2.14. Three modes of cracking that can be applied to a crack.

For each mode of loading, the singular stress fields around a crack tip in
a homogeneous, isotropic, linear elastic material can be written in a
compact form: see Table 2.1,Table 2.2,and Table 2.3.The stress intensity
factors KI, KII, KIII define the amplitude of the crack tip singularity. That
is, stresses near the crack tip increase in proportion to K. More over the

SIFs completely define the crack tip conditions, if K is known, it is

possible to solve for all components of stress, strain, displacement as a
function of r and . This single parameter description of crack tip
conditions turns out to be one of the most important concepts in linear
elastic fracture mechanics. George R.Irwin is responsible for this
discovery.

TABLE 2.1
Stress field ahead of a crack tip for Mode I and Mode II in a linear elastic,
isotropic material

TABLE 2.2
Crack tip displacement for Mode I and Mode II (linear elastic, isotropic material)

TABLE 2.3
Non-Zero stress and displacement components in Mode III (linear elastic,
isotropic material)

 Consider the Mode I loading, the singular stress field on the crack plane,
where

=0. The normal stresses in the x and y directions are

x x yy

KI

(1)

2r

Fig. (2.15) is a plot of y y Vs distance ahead of the crack tip. Eqn. (1) is
only valued near the crack tip, where

1
r

the singularity dominates the

stress field. Stresses far from the crack tip are governed by the remote
boundary conditions. We can identify a singularity dominated zone as
the region ahead of the crack tip where the equations in Tables 2.1 to2.3
describe the crack tip fields.

Fig. 2.15 Stress normal to crack plane in Mode I

Definition of Stress Intensity Factor

The singularity Dominated Zone (SDZ) is shown to be nearly constant

for all crack lengths and reasonably independent of specimen type.
As a rule of thumb, the size of SDZ is of the order of two percent of the
distance to the nearest boundary in typical specimen geometries.

Studies of the size of the SDZ demonstrates that there is a finite,abeit

small, region around a crack tip in which the state of stress (expect
possibly for an additional uniform stress parallel to the crack line) is
adequately represented by the single parameter K.The significance of this
observation cannot be overstated.

 Unlike the concept of a Stress Concentration Factor (SCF) that

determines the magnitude of the stress at a single point, the
parameter K, called the Stress Intensity Factor (SIF), provides a
complete description of the state of stress, strain and displacements
over some region of the body. Since the SIF represents the strength
of the singularity i.e the rate at which the stresses approach infinity
we can formally define K as

K Lim yy ( 0) 2
0

Where is the distance measured from the crack tip, and the limit is
taken from the material (+) side.

 Applying this definition to the yy stress for the Centre Cracked

Tension CC(T) problem, we found that, for this geometry

K a
Note that K contains the crack length as a parameter.Therefore unlike
the SCF the SIF is size dependent.

In addition; The SIF must be a function of the geometry of the

body.Therefore, we can infer that in general; the SIF must be of the
form

a
K a . Y
w

Where Y(a/w) is a dimensionless shape factor that embodies the effect

of all of the geometric parameters and W is any characteristic in-plane
dimension(often the width of the body).For the Centre Cracked Tension

Panel, Y(a/w) = 1.0.

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

Stress Intensity Factor Solutions
Through crack in a wide plate subjected to a remote tensile stress;

Mode I loading

KI a

Single edge crack in a semi-infinite plate; Mode I loads

K I 1.12 a
Angled crack
If 0 , mixed mode I and mode II loading

K I Cos 2 a

K II Sin . Cos a

More accurate SIF solutions for a through crack of length 2a in a plate

of finite width 2W have been obtained by FEA. Numerical solutions of
this type are usually fit to a polynomial expression. One such solution is
1
2

2
4
a
a
a


K I a Sec
1 0.025 0.06
W
W
2W

Figure 2.22 presents their solution graphically.

Table 2.4 lists SIF solution for several common configurations and
these solutions are graphically presented in Fig.2.23.

Fig.2.22 Comparison of finite width corrections for a center cracked

plate in tension

Table 2.4 KI solutions for common test specimens

Standard texts and Reference books contain an extensive collection

of SIF solutions.

Several handbooks evolved solely to SIF solutions have also been

published.

For more complex situations the SIFs can be determined by

experimental techniques or finite element analysis (numerical
methods).

Fig. 2.23 Plot of stress intensity solutions from table 2.4

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

Relationship Between K And G

Two parameters that describe the behaviour of cracks have been

introduced so far! The energy release rate G and the stress intensity
factor K. The former parameter quantifies the net change in potential

energy that accomplishes an increment of crack extension, the latter

quantity characterizes the stresses, strains, and displacements near the
crack tip. For linear elastic material behavior, K and G
related.

are uniquely

The well known G-KI relation is

K 2I
G *
E

Where E* = E for a plane stress state

E*

E
1 2

for a plane strain state

Irwin performed a crack closure analysis to prove that the above

relation applies to all cracked body configurations.

The above analysis can be performed for all three modes of loading
leading to

and

K 2II
G *
E
K 2III
G
2

for mode II loading

for mode III loading

When all three modes of loading are present; the energy release rate is
given by
2
I
*

2
II
*

2
III

K
K
K
G

2
E
E

The above relation however assumes self-similar crack growth. Such is

usually not the case for mixed-mode fracture problems. We discuss
energy release rate. stress intensity factor relations in mixed-mode
fracture problems later.

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

Crack Tip Plasticity Plastic Zone Size

Linear elastic stress analysis of a crack predicts infinite stresses at the

crack tip. In real materials, however, the stresses at the crack tip are
finite because of a finite crack tip radius. Inelastic material deformation,
such as plastic flow in metals and crazing in polymers, leads to further
relaxation of crack tip stresses.

 The elastic stress analysis becomes increasingly inaccurate as the

inelastic region at the crack tip grows. Simple corrections to LEFM

parameter are available when moderate crack tip yielding occurs.
For more extensive yielding, alternative crack tip parameters (Like

path independent integral J and the Crack Tip Opening Displacement

(CTOD) have been proposed.

The size of the plastic zone at the crack tip can be estimated by two
methods: The Irwin approach and the Strip yield model.

 The Irwin approach: the results from elastic stress analysis are used to
estimate the elastic-plastic boundary. On the crack plane (
normal stress is

yy

=0) the

KI
2r

For a plane stress conditions, yielding occurs when y y = y s ; the yield

strength of the material. Therefore, the plastic zone size is

1
ry
2

KI

ys

If we neglect strain-hardening effects, the stress distribution for

r ry

can be represented by a horizontal line at y y= y s,as Fig 2.29 illustrates.

The stress singularity is truncated by yielding of the material at the

crack tip.

Fig. 2.29 First-order and second-order estimates of plastic zone size (ry and rp
respectively). The cross-hatched area represents load that must be redistributed,
resulting in a larger plastic zone.

 A simple force balance leads to a second order estimate of the plastic

zone, rp
1
rp

KI

ys

which is twice as large as

r y the first order estimate.

In plane strain, yielding is suppressed by the triaxial stress state

( xx , y y , zz ) and the size of the plastic zone is smaller by a factor of
three:
1 K I
ry
6 y s

Irwin also defines an effective crack length as the sum of the actual crack
size a and plastic zone correction

ry :

a eff a ry
The effective SIF is computed by inserting
the geometry of interest

K eff Y a eff a eff

a eff into the SIF solution for

 The strip yield model: Illustrated in Fig 2.31 was first proposed Dugdale

and Barenblatt (1962). The early analysis considered a through crack in

an infinite plate. The strip yield plastic zone is modeled by assuming a
crack of length 2a + 2, where is the length of the plastic zone, with a
closure stress equal to y s applied at each crack tip Fig.2.31 (b)).

Fig. 2.31. The strip yield model. The plastic zone is modeled by yield
magnitude compressive stress at each crack tip (b)

 This model approximates elastic plastic behavior by superimposing two

elastic solutions; a through crack under remote tension and a through
crack with closure stresses at the tip. Therefore the strip yield model is

an application of the principle of superposition. The plastic zone length,

must be chosen such that the SIFs from the remote tension and closure
stresses cancel one another. The solution for the plastic zone size is

K I

8 y s

for y s

1
Note the similarity with the Irwins analysis, since
= 0.318 and

= 0.392, the Irwin and strip yield model predict similar plastic zone
8
sizes.

The plastic zone shape predicted by the strip yield model bears little

resemblance to actual plastic zone in metals, but many polymers produce

crack tip coarse zones which look very much like Fig 2.31(a)

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

Plastic Zone Shapes:
The estimates of plastic zone size presented so far consider only the

crack plane

=0. It is possible to estimate the extent of plasticity at all

angles by invoking an appropriate yield criterion to the crack tip stress

field equations in Table 2.1to 2.3

Consider the Von- mises equivalent stress

2 2 3 3 1
2

1
2 2

According to Von mises criteria, yielding occurs when e= y s,

the yield strength of the material.

For plane stress or plane strain conditions, the principal stresses are
computed as
1 , 2

xx y y
2

xx y y
2xy

2

For plane stress 3 =0, for plane strain 3 1 2

For mode I loading of a crack, using the crack-tip stress field in Table
2.1 we get
1

KI

KI

2 r
2 r

Cos 1 Sin
2
2

Cos 1 Sin
2
2

3 = 0 plane stress
3

2 K I
2 r

Cos

Combining the above equations, we obtain for mode I loading plastic

zone radius r as function of :
1 K I
ry
4 y s

2
1

Cos

Sin

for plane stress

(A)

for plane strain

(B)

1 K I
3
2
2

ry
1
2
1

Cos

Sin

4 y s
2

These equations are plotted in Fig 2.34(a), define the approximate

boundary between elastic and plastic behaviour. The corresponding

equation for mode II and mode III conditions is plotted in Figs,

2.34(b) and 2.34(c) respectively.

Note the significant difference in the size and shape of the mode I

plastic zones for plane stress and plane strain. The latter condition
suppresses
KI

yielding, resulting in a smaller plastic zone for a given

value.

These results are not strictly correct because they are based on a purely
elastic stress analysis. Crack tip plasticity causes stress redistribution,
which is not taken into account in Fig.2.34.

The Irwin plasticity correction, which accounts for stress redistribution

by means of an effective crack length, is also not totally correct.

Fig.2.34 Crack tip plastic zone shapes estimated from the elastic solutions( tables
2.1 and 2.3 ) and the Von Mises yield criterion.

Comparison of plane strain Mode I plastic zone shape predicted using

eqn (B) with a detailed elastic-plastic crack tip stress solution obtained
from Finite Element Analysis is presented in Fig 2.35. The detailed
FEA assumes a material with the stress-strain relationship.


0 0 0

where 0 , 0 , and n are material constants. In particular n

characterizes the strain-hardening rate (n = 5,10,50) (high, medium, low
strain hardening)

Given the difficulties of defining the plastic zone unambiguously with a

detailed FEA, the estimates of plastic zone size and shape from elastic
analysis (Fig.2.34) appear to be reasonable.

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

Plane Stress Versus Plane Strain

The conditions ahead of a crack front are neither plane stress nor
plane strain, but are three-dimensional. There are limiting cases where
a two-dimensional assumption provides a valid approximation.

Consider a cracked plate with thickness B subjected to in-plane

loading. Without the crack, the plate is in a state of plane stress
( z z= 0). In the cracked plate, regions away from the crack front
should also be in a state of plane stress. Material around the crack

tip is stressed to a higher level than the surrounding material.

Because of the large stress normal to the crack plane, the material
in the vicinity of the crack tip tends to contract both in the X and Z
directions, but is prevented from doing so by the surrounding
material. This CONSTRAINT induces a triaxial state of stress near
the crack tip. Plane strain conditions exist in the interior of the
plate while material on plate surfaces is in a plane stress state.
Figure (2.39) is a plot of the normal stress as a function of
Z
B

for

r
1 . These results were obtained from a threeB

dimensional elastic-plastic finite element analysis. Note the

transition from plane strain (at mid thickness) to plane stress at the
surfaces.

Fig. 2.39 Traverse stress through the thickness as a function of distance from the
crack tip.

 The stress state at the elastic-plastic boundary depends on the plastic

zone size r y relative to the plate thickness B. plane strain conditions
exist if r y << B. The stress state is predominantly plane stress if the
plastic size r y is of the same order as the thickness. However a triaxial
stress state may exist deep inside the plastic zone.

Figure (2.40) shows mode I plastic zones at mid-thickness obtained

from a three-dimensional elastic-plastic finite element analysis. The

2
e

elastic plastic boundary is defined at von m ise = y s .As. K I

y s
Increases relative to the thickness B, the plastic zone grows, as one
might expect. However it is equally interesting to note the change in
shape of the elastic plastic boundary. At low KI values, the plastic zone
has a typical plane strain shape, but takes on a plane stress shape as KJ

increases.

Fig 2.40 Effect of KI, relative to thickness, of the plastic zone size and shape

Nonlinear 3-dimensional finite element analysis of a compact tension (CT)

specimen. Von Mises equivalent stress shown on a deformed model.

Von-Mises estimates of the shape of the plastic zone for plane

stress and plane strain

Transition of the plane stress to plane strain plastic zone size

in plates of finite thickness

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

SIF as a failure criterion:
The stresses near the crack tip in a linear elastic material vary as
the SIF defines the amplitude of the singularity.

1 ,
r

Fracture (failure by crack extension) occurs at a critical SIF value K=Kc,

thus Kc value, is a measure of fracture toughness, is a material constant
that is independent of the size and geometry of the cracked body.

The energy release rate G is uniquely related to stress intensity factor K,

G also provides a single parameter description of crack tip conditions,
and is an alternative measure of toughness.

 The microscopic events that lead to fracture in various materials

generally occur well within the plastic zone. Thus even if the plastic zone
size is very small, fracture may not nucleate in a singularity dominated
zone assumed in LEFM. This fact raises an important question: is SIF a

useful failure criterion in materials that exhibit inelastic deformation at

the crack tip?

Under certain conditions, SIF (K) still uniquely characterizes crack tip

conditions even when a plastic zone is present! In such cases Kc is a

geometry independent material constant. And K= Kc is a varied failure
criterion!!

Consider a test specimen and a structure loaded to the same KI level, as

illustrated in Fig.2.41. As Load is increased, both configurations will fail

at the same critical stress intensity factor KIC, provided the plastic zone
size remains small in each case. Similarly, if both configurations are

loaded in fatigue at the same K, the crack growth rates will be similar as
long as the cyclic plastic zone is embedded within the singularitydominated zone in each case!

Fig. 2.41 Schematic test specimen and structure loaded to the same stress intensity.
The crack tip conditions should be identical in both configurations as long as the
plastic zone is small compared to all relevant dimensions. Thus both will fail at the
same critical K value.

Figure 2.42 schematically illustrates the stress distributions in the test

specimen and the structure shown in Fig.2.41 In the singularity
dominated zone, a log-log plot of the stress distribution is linear with

a slope of

2.

Inside the plastic zone the stresses are lower than

predicted by the elasticity solution, but are identical for the two
configurations, higher order terms become significant and the stress

fields are different for the structure and test specimen. The SIF does
not characterize the amplitudes of the high order terms.

Fig. 2.42 Crack tip stress fields for the specimen and structure in fig. 2.41

 The critical stress intensity factor for a given mode is a material constant,
however, it varies with the mode of loading that is

K IC K IIC K IIIC
K IICand K IIIC are generally greater than K IC . Consequently Mode I loading

has the most practical importance.

The critical stress intensity factor KC is a material constant only when
certain conditions are met. Otherwise, KC can be geometry dependent.
Figure 2.43 illustrates the effect of thickness on the critical Mode I stress
intensity factor. Measured fracture toughness decreases as thickness is
increased until a plateau is reached: further increases in thickness have
little or no effect on measured toughness: the critical K I value at the plate
are denoted as K IC is the plane strain fracture toughness a material
property.

Fig. 2.43 Effect of specimen thickness on Mode I fracture toughness

 According the ASTM standard test method for K IC , the following

specimen size requirement, must be met to obtain a valid K IC result in
metals

K IC

a, B, W a 2.5

ys

This equation was based on experimental observations of the test

specimen size dependence of fracture toughness in steel and aluminium
alloys. The constraint on thickness B ensures plane strain state, while the
constraint on in-plane dimension W ensures that the material behaviour
is linear elastic and that the Mode I SIF, KI characterizes the crack
tip conditions.

K IC is a material property that des not depend on the size or

geometry of the test specimen used to measure K IC .

While plane strain conditions are necessary to measure a valid K IC , the

lack of plane strain does not necessarily invalidate LEFM. As long

as the in-plane dimensions are sufficiently large to confine the
crack tip plastic zone to the singularity-dominated zone, the SIF is

a valid Crack tip-characterizing parameter.

A fracture toughness value obtained from a lab test specimen in a plane
stress condition is applicable to a cracked structure/component made of

the same material, as long as the test specimen & the component have
the same thickness and the in-plane dimensions of both are much larger
than the crack-tip plastic zone size.

 When elastic-plastic material behaviour becomes significant,

one should discard the SIF and the SERR and adopt a crack tip

parameter that takes elastic-plastic behaviour into account. Two

such parameters, the Crack Tip Opening Displacement (CTOD)
& the J-integral are the subjects of EPFM (elastic plastic
fracture mechanics).

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

Mixed-Mode Fracture Summary

Fatigue cracks in structures/components are generally subjected to

combined-mode loading.

Even when a component containing a fatigue crack is subjected to

purely tensile far-field loading, mixed-mode conditions may prevail

ahead of the crack tip if it is inclined at some arbitrary angle to the

tensile axis, or micro structural and environmental factors promote a
non - coplanar fatigue crack growth.

A fatigue crack located at the interface between two materials is under

mixed-mode loading even when the far-field stresses are purely in mode
I. The resulting crack growth may not be coplanar. Crack branching is a

possibility.

Mixed-mode loading conditions at the tip of a fatigue crack can lead to

pronounced changes in the effective crack driving force, the size/shape
of the crack tip plastic zone, the rate of crack propagation, the extent of
crack closure and the microscopic mechanisms of DAMAGE.

A compendium of available SIF solutions for kinked cracks and the

length of the deflected part of the crack are available.

Contours of plastic zone for different values of the strain hardening

exponent n for mode I and mode II cracks under plane stress and plane

strain conditions are available.

LEFM: MIXED MODE FRACTURE

Objective: To

predict Fracture of solids/structures under

mixed mode loading conditions.
Focus: on crack extension direction, critical stress (load)
and stability of crack growth.
Fracture Surface: f (KI,KII,KIII,KIC,KIIC,KIIIC) = 0 in the
KI,KII,KIII space.

Ex:
Crack Driving Force:

G = GI + GII + GIII GC

OR

LEFM: MIXED MODE FRACTURE

Fracture Test

Data is essential to determine the constants p,q,r, for

engineering materials. Fracture toughness tests are required to measure
KIC,KIIC,KIIIC,.etc.
Mixed mode Fracture Criteria:
Modified Griffith Criterion;
Maximum Tangential Stress Criterion;
Strain Energy Density Criterion.

LEFM: MIXED MODE FRACTURE

Modified Griffith Criterion
Includes Strain Energy Release Rates (SERR) associated with all
the modes
SERR for a Crack in a plate under combined Mode I and Mode II
loading is given by
G = GI + GII
Crack extension will occur in the direction of maximum energy
release rate!

LEFM: MIXED MODE FRACTURE

The SERR G() for various hypothetical Crack extension
directions (- < < ) is Calculated (?) and plotted as shown in
the Sketch below.

Crack Growth Direction C

Fracture occurs when

G (=C) GC
K 2IC
GC
E
And KIC is the Critical Mode I, SIF.( a material constant)

LEFM: MIXED MODE FRACTURE

Maximum Tangential Stress Criterion.
Crack extension will occur in the direction where tangential stress
At an infinitesimal radial distance r = r0 (r0 << a) measured from the crack

tip is maximum and fracture occurs when max reaches a critical value.
Crack Extension Direction

gives = C !

 The Tangential stress is calculated as:

Fracture occurs in the direction = C when

KI sin C + KII ( 3cos C-1) = 0.
Fracture occurs when max occurs at = C reaches a critical value c
Where

LEFM: MIXED MODE FRACTURE

Maximum Tangential Stress Criterion
c is obtained from the Mode I Fracture toughness test data,
namely KIC as

Fracture Surface:
KIC

LEFM: MIXED MODE FRACTURE

Maximum Tangential Stress Criterion
Experimental results (mixed mode Fracture test results!) by Erdogan
and sih who proposed this criterion for certain materials do correlate
with the predictions!!
SOURCE:
Erdogan F. and Sih.G.C.(1963) on Crack Extension in plates under plane
loading and transverse shear, ASME Journal of Basic Engg.85,pp519527.

LEFM: MIXED MODE FRACTURE

Strain Energy Density Criterion
Consider a crack subjected to combined Mode I and Mode II loading.
The strain energy U can be obtained from the Crack tip stress field and
corresponding strain field as

the Strain Energy Density (SED) Function:

 W = W(r, )

LEFM : MIXED MODE FRACTURE

Strain Energy Density Criterion

Strain Energy Density Factor S

S() =[ g11().KI2+2g12()KI KII+g22().KII2]/.

Crack extension will occur in the direction of Minimum

Strain Energy Density factor when Smin reaches a critical value Sc.

In the immediate vicinity of the crack tip

at r=r0 (r0<<a) S() is evaluated. S is Minimum

when

and

This enables us to evaluate =c. The direction of the crack

propagation.

Fracture will occur when Smin (i.e.S at =c) reaches a critical

value Sc i.e.
Smin > Sc

SC is obtained using Mode I fracture toughness test data!

LEFM: MIXED MODE FRACTURE

Strain Energy Density Factor Approach.

the MTS criterion is insensitive wrt plane strain OR plane stress
states. The SED criterion prediction depends on plane stress OR plane
strain state assumption.
An example of Mixed Mode Fracture

KIC = 40 Mpa
E = 200Gpa
= 0.3

LEFM: MIXED MODE FRACTURE

Strain Energy Density Factor Approach.

For = 600, Compare the predictions of the three proposed criteria

(crack extension direction c; Fracture Stress f).
SOURCE:
Sih, G.C.(1973) Some Basic problems in Fracture Mechanics
and New concepts,Int. J.Engineering Fracture
Mechanics,5,pp.365-377
Sih,G.C.(1974). SED Factor Applied to Mixed Mode Crack
Problems, Int. J.Fracture.10,pp 305-321
Sih,G.C.(1973).Methods of Analysis and Solutions of Crack
problems, Mechanics of Fracture, Vol I, Noordhoff

 MATHEMATICAL DERIVATION OF CRACK-TIP STRESS

FIELD:Eigen-function expansion-method:

Williams, M.L:- On the stress Distribution at the Base of a stationary Crack,

Trans.ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics,24 (1957) 109-114.
Williams, M.L:- On the Bending Stress Distribution at the Base of a stationary
Crack,Trans.ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics,28 (1961) 78-82.
Murthy,M.V.V , Raju.K.N , and Viswanth.S. on the Bending Stress
Distribution at the tip of a stationary Crack from Reissners Theory,
Int.J.Fracture,17 (1981) 537-552.

LINEAR ELASTIC FRACTURE MECHANICS:

Mixed-mode fracture criteria:

When two or more modes of loading are simultaneously present, the

energy release rate contributions from each mode are additive.
K 2I K 2II K 2III
G * *
(1)
2
E
E
However, this equation assumes self-similar crack growth, which is in
doubt in mixed-mode fracture.

Consider the angle crack problem shown in the figure. Eqn (1) gives
the energy release rate for co-planar crack growth.
2
2
K
K
i.e. G I II
E* E*
with

K I Cos 2 a
K II Sin . Cos a
When fracture under mixed-mode loading occurs. The crack tends to
propagate orthogonal to the applied normal stress, i.e., the crack
growth is not self similar. A propagating crack seeks the path of

least-resistance (or the path of maximum crack driving force) and

need not be confined to its initial plane. If the material is
homogenous, isotropic, the crack will propagate in such a direction

as to maximize the energy release rate.

 We now present the evaluation of energy release rate as a function of

propagation direction in mixed-mode problems. Suppose that the crack
in question forms an infinitesimal kink at angle .w r t the plane of the
crack. The SIFs at the tip of this kink differ from the nominal SIFs of
the main crack. The mode I and mode II SIFs at the tip of the kink
crack as a function of :
k I C11 K I C12 K II

k II C 21 K I C 22 K II

Where the coefficients Cij

3
1
3
C11 Cos Cos
4
2 4
2
3
3
C12 Sin Sin s
4 2
2

1
3
C 21 Sin Sin s
4 2
2

1
3
3
C 22 Cos Cos
4
2 4
2

The energy release rate for the kinked crack is

k I k II
G *
E
E*

Fig.2.47 is a plot G() normalized by G(=0) . The peak in G() at

each corresponds to the point where kI exhibits maxima and kII=0,
thus the maximum energy release rate is
2
*

I
G
E*

where * is the angle at which both G and kI exhibit a maximum at

kII=0. Crack growth in homogeneous isotropic material should initiate
at = *.

Fig. 2.47 Local energy release rate at the tip of a kinked crack

Figure 2.48 shows the effect of in the optimum propagation angle.

The dash line corresponds to crack propagation perpendicular to the
direction of applied stress . Note that the Gmax criterion (maximum
energy release criterion for mixed-mode fracture problems) implies an
initial propagation plane that differs slightly from the plane normal to
the applied stress.

Fig. 2.48 Optimum propagation angle for a crack oriented at an angle

from the stress axis

Biaxial loading: Fig.2.49 illustrates a cracked plate subjected to

principal stresses 1 and 2 ( 1 > 2 )

Applying superposition leads to the following expression for mode I &

mode II SIFs KI or KII

K I 1 a Cos 2 B Sin 2

K II 1 a Sin Cos 1 B
2
1

Where B is the biaxiality ratio B =

The mode I or mode II SIFs for an assumed kinked crack is obtained as

k I 1 a Cos2 B Sin 2 C11 Sin Cos 1 BC12

Fig.2.49 Cracked plane subjected to a biaxial stress state

Fig.2.50 illustrates the effect of Band on the propagation angle .

Note that when B>0 and

=90, crack propagation occurs in the plane

of the crack ( = 0), since the crack plane coincides with a principal

plane and is thereby subjected pure mode I loading !!

Fig. 2.5 Optimum propagation angle as a function of and biaxiallity

LEFM:Linear Elastic Fracture mechanics

Stress Intensity Factor Approach

Executive Summary

Solving equations of SOLID MECHANICS (Differential

Equations of Equilibrium,Stress-strain relations,Strain-Displacement
relations,Surface Traction Boundary Conditions,etc)& deriving
expressions for ij,ij,i in the Immediate vicinity of a crack tip is
MATHEMATICALLY Involved & therefore a specialists job.So,we
discuss the solution only!!

 Irwins Invention of SIF(K) as a single parameter description of

Crack tip stress field is a breakthrough in Fracture Mechanic
Research
Methods of Analysis & SIF solutions to cracked body problems
have been published.This documents the enormous amount of
RESEARCH.
Unique relationships between G & K are derived establishing
the equivalence between the strain energy release rate & Stress
intensity factor Approaches
Analytical Methods,Experimental Techniques & Computational
procedures to predict crack tip plastic zone shape & size have
been developed.