journal article·2017-08

Fracture tests under mixed mode I + III loading: An assessment based on the local energy

Filippo Berto, MR Ayatollahi, A Campagnolo

Publisher page

Abstract

In this paper, some recent data exploring mixed mode I + III fracture of cracked polymethyl methacrylate specimens are re-analysed in terms of the local energy. The data have been obtained by using a new loading fixture proposed for exploring mixed mode I + III fracture experimentally. While a large bulk of experimental results from cracked specimens of polymethyl methacrylate under pure modes of loading, in particular under mode I loading, can be found in the literature, only very few tests have been carried out considering multiaxial static loadings, and for this reason, only limited studies have been performed on possible criteria for the fracture assessment under mixed mode I + III conditions. By taking advantage of the recent set of data on polymethyl methacrylate tested at different values of the mode mixity ratio, a criterion based on the local strain energy density previously applied by the same authors only to pure modes of loading is successfully extended here to the case of tension and torsion loadings applied in combination. Good agreement is shown to exist between the theoretical estimates and the experimental data.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Fatigue and fracture mechanics · Structural Integrity and Reliability Analysis · Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Management and Engineering, University of Padua, Vicenza, Italy

Department of Engineering Design and Materials, Richard Birkelands vei 2b, 7491 Trondheim, Norway

Fatigue and Fracture Research Laboratory, Center of Excellence in Experimental Solid Mechanics and Dynamics, School of Mechanical Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

References (48)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.tafmec.2013.11.00810.1016/j.tafmec.2013.11.008 ↗
2. 10.1007/s00603-012-0325-z10.1007/s00603-012-0325-z ↗
3. ASTM E399-90(1997) (1997) Standard test method for plane-strain fracture toughness of metallic materials.
4. 10.1177/105678951453074510.1177/1056789514530745 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2009.02.01610.1016/j.engfracmech.2009.02.016 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.euromechsol.2014.09.01210.1016/j.euromechsol.2014.09.012 ↗
7. 10.1007/s11223-015-9682-710.1007/s11223-015-9682-7 ↗
8. 10.1111/ffe.1227210.1111/ffe.12272 ↗
9. Berto F, Campagnolo A, Chebat F, et al. (2016) Fatigue strength of steel rollers with failure occurring at the weld root based on the local strain energy values: Modelling and fatigue assessment. International Journal of Fatigue 82: 643 –657.10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2015.09.023 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2013.02.01110.1016/j.engfracmech.2013.02.011 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2012.05.00110.1016/j.engfracmech.2012.05.001 ↗
12. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.627.7710.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.627.77 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.tafmec.2009.10.00110.1016/j.tafmec.2009.10.001 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.mser.2013.11.00110.1016/j.mser.2013.11.001 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.12.04510.1016/j.carbon.2011.12.045 ↗
16. 10.1111/j.1460-2695.2011.01585.x10.1111/j.1460-2695.2011.01585.x ↗
17. 10.1007/BF0004037310.1007/BF00040373 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2005.12.01110.1016/j.engfracmech.2005.12.011 ↗
19. Cho S, Nakamura Y, Mohanty B, et al. (2006) Study on control of crack-propagation in blasting. In: Fragblast 8 , Santiago, Chile, pp.124–128.
20. 10.1029/95JB0250710.1029/95JB02507 ↗
21. Ewing PD · International Journal of Fracture · 1976 · 12 · 8510.1007/BF00036011 ↗
22. Gallo P · Fracture and Structural Integrity · 2015 · 34 · 180
23. 10.1007/s10704-007-9104-310.1007/s10704-007-9104-3 ↗
24. Gough HJ · Arch Proc Inst Automobile Eng 1906–1947 (vols 1–41) · 1936 · 31 · 821
25. 10.1016/S1359-6454(98)00170-010.1016/S1359-6454(98)00170-0 ↗
26. 10.1007/s10704-006-9008-710.1007/s10704-006-9008-7 ↗
27. 10.1007/s10704-005-3943-610.1007/s10704-005-3943-6 ↗
28. 10.1111/j.1460-2695.2009.01373.x10.1111/j.1460-2695.2009.01373.x ↗
29. 10.1111/j.1460-2695.2004.00733.x10.1111/j.1460-2695.2004.00733.x ↗
30. 10.1023/A:101359593061710.1023/A:1013595930617 ↗
31. 10.1007/s10704-010-9476-710.1007/s10704-010-9476-7 ↗
32. 10.1007/s10704-005-4043-310.1007/s10704-005-4043-3 ↗
33. 10.1016/0956-7151(91)90208-I10.1016/0956-7151(91)90208-I ↗
34. 10.1520/JTE11841J10.1520/JTE11841J ↗
35. 10.1016/0142-1123(85)90004-010.1016/0142-1123(85)90004-0 ↗
36. 10.1007/BF0094272610.1007/BF00942726 ↗
37. 10.1016/0013-7944(87)90032-410.1016/0013-7944(87)90032-4 ↗
38. 10.1007/BF0003549310.1007/BF00035493 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.03.03510.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.03.035 ↗
40. Sutton MA, Deng X and Reynolds A (2006) Crack growth and stress intensity prediction techniques. Report, Delivery Order 0027-1: Mixed Mode Failure Criteria, University of South Carolina, USA, March.10.21236/ADA460082 ↗
41. 10.1177/105678951351934910.1177/1056789513519349 ↗
42. 10.1177/105678951351407110.1177/1056789513514071 ↗
43. 10.1007/s00707-015-1323-510.1007/s00707-015-1323-5 ↗
44. 10.1134/S102995991503003010.1134/S1029959915030030 ↗
45. 10.1007/BF0019110610.1007/BF00191106 ↗
46. 10.1007/BF0003293610.1007/BF00032936 ↗
47. 10.1023/B:FRAC.0000022244.31825.3b10.1023/B:FRAC.0000022244.31825.3b ↗
48. 10.1016/0013-7944(83)90007-310.1016/0013-7944(83)90007-3 ↗