Are you, or someone you know, interested in learning about the latest developments happening right now in Fracture Mechanics? Would you like the chance to meet a wide range of experts from across the industry? Do you want to know more about the uses and capabilities of Crack Growth Analysis tools? All of these opportunities and more are available to you at the AFGROW Users Workshop.
The purpose of the Workshop is to provide a forum for AFGROW Users to come together to exchange information and best-practices, network with peers from the industry, and get a chance to talk with the AFGROW developers and community.
Group discussions will also provide direction for new capabilities and improvements, best practice methods, and tips and tricks from the experts. The AFGROW team will also provide information on our latest development efforts for the upcoming year.
More Information
Section 11.2.3.2. Indirect Methods
The indirect methods use relationships that exist between the
stress-intensity factor (K) and the elastic-energy content (U) of
the cracked structure. These
relationships are developed in Section 1.3.2 along with a full discussion of
the strain energy release rate (G) and compliance (C), i.e. the
inverse stiffness of the system. The
stress-intensity factor is related to these parameters by the following:
|
(11.2.33)
|
|
(11.2.34)
|
|
(11.2.35)
|
where B is the plate thickness and is the elastic
modulus E in plane stress and is E/ (1-n2) in plane strain.
The elastic energy content and the compliance of cracked
structures are obtained for a range of crack sizes either by solving the
problem for different crack sizes or by unzipping nodes. Differentiation with respect to crack size
gives K from the above equations.
The advantage of the elastic-energy content and compliance methods is
that a fine mesh is not necessary, since accuracy of crack-tip stresses is not
required. A disadvantage is that
differentiation procedures can introduce errors.
The strain energy release rate relationship (Equation 11.2.33)
was derived based on the use of the crack tip stress field and displacement
equations to calculate the work done by the forces required to close the crack
tip. The crack tip closing work can be
calculated by uncoupling the next nodal point in front of the crack tip and by
calculating the work done by the nodal forces to close the crack to its
original size.
The concept is that if a crack were to extend by a small
amount, Da,
the energy absorbed in the process is equal to the work required to close the
crack to its original length. The
general integral equations for strain energy release rates for Modes 1 and 2
deformations are
|
(11.2.36)
|
|
The significance of this approach is that it permits an
evaluation of both K1 and K2 from the
results of a single analysis.
In finite-element analysis, the displacements have a linear
variation over the elements and the stiffness matrix is written in terms of
forces and displacements at the element corners or nodes. Therefore, to be consistent with
finite-element representation, the approach for evaluating G1
and G2 is based on the nodal-point forces and
displacements. An explanation of
application of this work-energy method is given with reference to Figure 11.2.12. The crack and surrounding elements are a
small segment from a much larger finite-element model of a structure. In terms of the finite-element
representation, the amount of work required to close the crack, Da, is
one-half the product of the forces at nodes c and d and the distance (vc
- vd) which are required to close these nodes. The expressions for strain energy release
rates in terms of nodal-point displacements and forces are (see Figure 11.2.12 for notations)
Figure
11.2.18. Finite-Element nodes Near
Crack Tip.
|
(11.2.37)
|
|