Mechanics of Fracture – serie

It is weH known that the traditional failure criteria cannot adequately explain failures which occur at a nominal stress level considerably lower than the ultimate strength of the material. The current procedure for predicting the safe loads or safe useful life of a structural member has been evolved around the discipline oflinear fracture mechanics. This approach introduces the concept of a crack extension force which can be used to rank materials in some order of fracture resistance. The idea is to determine the largest crack that a material will tolerate without failure. Laboratory methods for characterizing the fracture toughness of many engineering materials are now available. While these test data are useful for providing some rough guidance in the choice of materials, it is not clear how they could be used in the design of a structure. The understanding of the relationship between laboratory tests and fracture design of structures is, to say the least, deficient. Fracture mechanics is presently at astandstill until the basic problems of scaling from laboratory models to fuH size structures and mixed mode crack propagation are resolved. The answers to these questions require some basic understanding ofthe theory and will not be found by testing more specimens. The current theory of fracture is inadequate for many reasons. First of aH it can only treat idealized problems where the applied load must be directed normal to the crack plane.

Composites offer great promise as light weight and strong materials for high performance structures. One of the major advantages of these materials as compared with metals is the basic way in which heterogeneity resist crack extension. In a fiber/matrix composite system, the fibers tend to cause cracks to form at closer spacing and delay the formation of a large crack. The enhancement of local failure such as fiber breaking, matrix cracking and interface debonding further reduces the energy level which might have otherwise reached the point of catastrophic failure. Even though substantial tests have been made on composite materials, little has been gained in the understanding and development of a predic­ tive procedure for composite failure. There are fundamental difficulties associated with incorporating the nonhomogeneous and anisotropic prop­ erties of the composite into the continuum mechanics analysis. Additional uncertainties arise from voids and defects that are introduced in the composite during manufacturing. Even a small quantity of mechanical imperfections can cause a marked influence on the composite strength. Moreover, the interface properties between the fibers and matrix or bonded laminae can also affect the load transmission characteristics significantly. It would be impossible to establish predictive procedures for composite failure unless realistic guidelines could be developed to control the manufacturing quality of composite systems.

It is weH known that the traditional failure criteria cannot adequately explain failures which occur at a nominal stress level considerably lower than the ultimate strength of the material. The current procedure for predicting the safe loads or safe useful life of a structural member has been evolved around the discipline oflinear fracture mechanics. This approach introduces the concept of a crack extension force which can be used to rank materials in some order of fracture resistance. The idea is to determine the largest crack that a material will tolerate without failure. Laboratory methods for characterizing the fracture toughness of many engineering materials are now available. While these test data are useful for providing some rough guidance in the choice of materials, it is not clear how they could be used in the design of a structure. The understanding of the relationship between laboratory tests and fracture design of structures is, to say the least, deficient. Fracture mechanics is presently at astandstill until the basic problems of scaling from laboratory models to fuH size structures and mixed mode crack propagation are resolved. The answers to these questions require some basic understanding ofthe theory and will not be found by testing more specimens. The current theory of fracture is inadequate for many reasons. First of aH it can only treat idealized problems where the applied load must be directed normal to the crack plane.

Experiments on fracture of materials are made for various purposes. Of primary importance are those through which criteria predicting material failure by deformation and/or fracture are investigated. Since the demands of engineering application always precede the development of theories, there is another kind of experiment where conditions under which a particular material can fail are simulated as closely as possible to the operational situation but in a simplified and standardized form. In this way, many of the parameters corresponding to fracture such as toughness, Charpy values, crack opening distance (COD), etc. are measured. Obviously, a sound knowledge of the physical theories governing material failure is necessary as the quantity of interest can seldom be evaluated in a direct manner. Critical stress intensity factors and critical energy release rates are examples. Standard test of materials should be distinguished from basic experi­ ments. They are performed to provide routine information on materials responding to certain conditions of loading or environment. The tension test with or without a crack is among one of the most widely used tests. Because they affect the results, with size and shape of the specimen, the rate of loading, temperature and crack configuration are standardized to enable comparison and reproducibility of results. The American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) provides a great deal of information on recommended procedures and methods of testing. The objective is to standardize specifications for materials and definition of technical terms.

Composites offer great promise as light weight and strong materials for high performance structures. One of the major advantages of these materials as compared with metals is the basic way in which heterogeneity resist crack extension. In a fiber/matrix composite system, the fibers tend to cause cracks to form at closer spacing and delay the formation of a large crack. The enhancement of local failure such as fiber breaking, matrix cracking and interface debonding further reduces the energy level which might have otherwise reached the point of catastrophic failure. Even though substantial tests have been made on composite materials, little has been gained in the understanding and development of a predic­ tive procedure for composite failure. There are fundamental difficulties associated with incorporating the nonhomogeneous and anisotropic prop­ erties of the composite into the continuum mechanics analysis. Additional uncertainties arise from voids and defects that are introduced in the composite during manufacturing. Even a small quantity of mechanical imperfections can cause a marked influence on the composite strength. Moreover, the interface properties between the fibers and matrix or bonded laminae can also affect the load transmission characteristics significantly. It would be impossible to establish predictive procedures for composite failure unless realistic guidelines could be developed to control the manufacturing quality of composite systems.