0
Research Papers

Effect of KIII on Fatigue Crack Growth Behavior

[+] Author and Article Information
Masanori Kikuchi

 Tokyo University of Science, 2641 Yamazaki, Noda, Chiba 278-8510, Japankik@me.noda.tus.ac.jp

Yoshitaka Wada

 Tokyo University of Science, Suwa, 5000-1 Toyohira, Chino, Nagano 391-0292, Japanwada@rs.suwa.tus.ac.jp

Chikako Ohdama

 Tokyo University of Science, 2641 Yamazaki, Noda, Chiba 278-8510, Japandama@me.noda.tus.ac.jp

J. Eng. Mater. Technol 134(4), 041009 (Aug 24, 2012) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4006978 History: Received September 05, 2011; Revised June 14, 2012; Published August 24, 2012; Online August 24, 2012

In this study, mixed-mode fatigue tests are conducted using surface-cracked specimens. Slant surface-cracked specimens are prepared with crack angles of 15 deg, 30 deg, 45 deg, and 60 deg. It is shown that a “factory roof” fracture is formed at the deepest point of the surface crack due to ΔKIII and causes the crack growth rate to decrease. Additionally, fatigue crack growth is simulated using the superposition finite element method (FEM) with crack growth criteria. It is shown that conventional crack growth criteria are not applicable to factory roof fractures. Finally, a modified criterion for the prediction of crack growth rate is proposed, fatigue crack growth simulation is conducted using this criterion, and the results are compared with experimental results.

Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Concept of S-FEM

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Crack growth direction

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Introduction of precrack

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Cutting out of slant-cracked specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Four-point bending test

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Experimental result of 45 deg specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Fracture surfaces (x-y plane)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Global and local meshes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparing simulation to experiment on the x-z surface of the 45 deg specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparing simulation to experiment on the x-y surface of the 45 deg specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of analysis and experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Stress intensity factors during crack propagation of the 45 deg specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Stress intensity factors during crack propagation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Comparing simulation to experiment on the x-y surface

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Relationship between cycle number and crack surface length

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In