Fracture toughness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it
has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article
by introducing more precise citations. (April 2009)

In materials science, fracture toughness is a property which describes the ability of a material

containing a crack to resist fracture, and is one of the most important properties of any material
for many design applications. The linear-elastic fracture toughness of a material is determined
from the stress intensity factor ( ) at which a thin crack in the material begins to grow. It is
denoted KIc and has the units of   or  . Plastic-elastic fracture toughness is
denoted by JIc, with the unit of J/cm2 or lbf-in/in2, and is a measurement of the energy required to
grow a thin crack.
The subscript Ic denotes mode I crack opening under a normal tensile stress perpendicular to the
crack, since the material can be made deep enough to stand shear (mode II) or tear (mode III).
Fracture toughness is a quantitative way of expressing a material's resistance to brittle fracture
when a crack is present. If a material has much fracture toughness it will probably
undergo ductile fracture. Brittle fracture is very characteristic of materials with less fracture
toughness.[1]
Fracture mechanics, which leads to the concept of fracture toughness, was broadly based on the
work of A. A. Griffith who, among other things, studied the behavior of cracks in brittle materials.

A related concept is the work of fracture ( ) which is directly proportional to  ,

where   is the Young's modulus of the material.[2] Note that, in SI units,   is given in J/m2.

Contents

 1 Example values
 2 Crack growth as a stability problem
 3 Conjoint action
 4 Stress-corrosion cracking (SCC)
 5 Toughening Mechanisms
o 5.1 Intrinsic Mechanisms
o 5.2 Extrinsic Mechanisms

 6 Fracture toughness testing methods

o 6.1 Determination of plane strain fracture toughness, KIc

o 6.2 Determination of tear resistance (Kahn tear test)

o 6.3 Fracture toughness of AISI steel
o 6.4 Other methods for determining fracture toughness

 7 See also
 8 References
 9 Other references

Example values[edit]
The following table shows some typical values of fracture toughness for various materials:
 Material Material KIc (MPa · m1/2)
type
Aluminum alloy (7075) 24

Steel alloy (4340) 50
Metal
Titanium alloy 44–66

Aluminum 14–28

Aluminum oxide 3–5

Silicon carbide 3–5

Ceramic
Soda-lime glass 0.7–0.8

Concrete 0.2–1.4

Polymethyl methacrylate 0.7–1.6

Polymer
Polystyrene 0.7–1.1

Mullite-fibre composite 1.8–3.3[3]

Composite
Silica aerogels 0.0008–0.0048[4]

Crack growth as a stability problem[edit]

Consider a body with flaws (cracks) that is subject to some loading; the stability of the crack can
be assessed as follows. We can assume for simplicity that the loading is of constant
displacement or displacement controlled type (such as loading with a screw jack); we can also
simplify the discussion by characterizing the crack by its area, A. If we consider an adjacent state
of the body as being one with a broader crack (area A+dA), we can then assess strain energy in
the two states and evaluate strain energy release rate.
The rate is reckoned with respect to the change in crack area, so if we use U for strain energy,
the strain energy release rate is numerically dU/dA. It may be noted that for a body loaded in
constant displacement mode, the displacement is applied and the force level is dictated
by stiffness (or compliance) of the body. If the crack grows in size, the stiffness decreases, so the
force level will decrease. This decrease in force level under the same displacement (strain) level
indicates that the elastic strain energy stored in the body is decreasing—is being released. Hence
the term strain energy release rate which is usually denoted with symbol G.
The strain energy release rate is higher for higher loads and broader cracks. If the strain energy
so released exceeds a critical value Gc, then the crack will grow spontaneously.
For brittle materials, Gc can be equated to the surface energy of the (two) new crack surfaces; in
other words, in brittle materials, a crack will grow spontaneously if the strain energy released is
equal to or more than the energy required to grow the crack surface(s). The stability condition can
be written as

elastic energy released = surface energy created.

If the elastic energy released is less than the critical value, then the crack will not grow; equality
signifies neutral stability and if the strain energy release rate exceeds the critical value, the crack
will start growing in an unstable manner. For ductile materials, energy associated with plastic
deformation has to be taken into account. When there is plastic deformation at the crack tip (as
occurs most often in metals) the energy to propagate the crack may increase by several orders of
magnitude as the work related to plastic deformation may be much larger than the surface
energy. In such cases, the stability criterion has to be restated as

elastic energy released = surface energy + plastic deformation energy.

Practically, this means a higher value for the critical value Gc. From the definition of G, we can
deduce that it has dimensions of work (or energy) /area or force/length. For ductilemetals GIc is
around 50–200 kJ/m2, for brittle metals it is usually 1–5 and for glasses and brittle polymers it is
almost always less than 0.5.
The problem can also be formulated in terms of stress instead of energy, leading to the
terms stress intensity factor K (or KI for mode I) and critical stress intensity factor Kc (andKIc).
These Kc and KIc (etc.) quantities are commonly referred to as fracture toughness, though it is
equivalent to use Gc. Typical values for KIcare 150 MN/m3/2 for ductile (very tough) metals, 25 for
brittle ones and 1–10 for glasses and brittle polymers. Notice the different units used
by GIc and KIc. Engineers tend to use the latter as an indication oftoughness.

Conjoint action[edit]
There are number of instances where this picture of a critical crack is modified by corrosion.
Thus, fretting corrosion occurs when a corrosive medium is present at the interface between two
rubbing surfaces. Fretting (in the absence of corrosion) results from the disruption of very small
areas that bond and break as the surfaces undergo friction, often under vibrating conditions. The
bonding contact areas deform under the localised pressure and the two surfaces gradually wear
away. Fracture mechanics dictates that each minute localised fracture has to satisfy the general
rule that the elastic energy released as the bond fractures has to exceed the work done in
plastically deforming it and in creating the (very tiny) fracture surfaces. This process is enhanced
when corrosion is present, not least because the corrosion products act as an abrasive between
the rubbing surfaces.
Fatigue is another instance where cyclical stressing, this time of a bulk lump of metal, causes
small flaws to develop. Ultimately one such flaw exceeds the critical condition and fracture
propagates across the whole structure. The fatigue life of a component is the time it takes for
criticality to be reached, for a given regime of cyclical stress. Corrosion fatigue is what happens
when a cyclically stressed structure is subjected to a corrosive environment at the same time.
This not only serves to initiate surface cracks but (see below) actually modifies the crack growth
process. As a result the fatigue life is shortened, often considerably.

Stress-corrosion cracking (SCC)[edit]

Main article: Stress corrosion cracking
This phenomenon is the unexpected sudden failure of normally ductile metals subjected to a
constant tensile stress in a corrosive environment. Certain austenitic stainless
steelsand aluminium alloys crack in the presence of chlorides, mild steel cracks in the presence
of alkali (boiler cracking) and copper alloys crack in ammoniacal solutions (season cracking).
Worse still, high-tensile structural steels crack in an unexpectedly brittle manner in a whole
variety of aqueous environments, especially chloride. With the possible exception of the latter,
which is a special example of hydrogen cracking, all the others display the phenomenon of
subcritical crack growth; i.e. small surface flaws propagate (usually smoothly) under conditions
where fracture mechanics predicts that failure should not occur. That is, in the presence of a
corrodent, cracks develop and propagate well below KIc. In fact, the subcritical value of the stress
intensity, designated as KIscc, may be less than 1% of KIc, as the following table shows:

Alloy SCC
KIc ( ) environment KIscc ( )
 13Cr steel 60 3% NaCl 12

18Cr-8Ni 200 42% MgCl2 10

Cu-30Zn 200 NH4OH, pH7 1

Al-3Mg-7Zn 25 aqueous halides 5

Ti-6Al-4V 60 0.6M KCl 20

The subcritical nature of propagation may be attributed to the chemical energy released as the
crack propagates. That is,

elastic energy released + chemical energy = surface energy + deformation energy.

The crack initiates at KIscc and thereafter propagates at a rate governed by the slowest process,
which most of the time is the rate at which corrosive ions can diffuse to the crack tip. As the crack
advances so K rises (because crack size appears in the calculation of stress intensity). Finally it
reaches KIc, whereupon swift fracture ensues and the component fails. One of the practical
difficulties with SCC is its unexpected nature. Stainless steels, for example, are employed
because under most conditions they are passive; i.e. effectively inert. Very often one finds a
single crack has propagated whiles the left metal surface stays apparently unaffected.

Toughening Mechanisms[edit]
Intrinsic Mechanisms[edit]
Intrinsic toughening mechanisms are processes which act ahead of the crack tip to increase the
material's toughness. These will tend to be related to the structure and bonding of the base
material, as well as microstructural features and additives to it. Examples of mechanisms include
crack deflection by secondary phases, crack bifurcation due to fine grain structure and
modification to the grain boundaries, and crack meandering by pores in the material. Any
alteration to the base material which increases its ductility can also be thought of as intrinsic
toughening.[5]
Extrinsic Mechanisms[edit]
Extrinsic toughening mechanisms are processes which act behind the crack tip to resist its further
opening. Examples include fibre/lamella bridging, where these structures hold the two fracture
surfaces together after the crack has propagated through the matrix, crack wedging from the
friction between two rough fracture surfaces, microcracking, where smaller cracks form in the
material around the main crack, relieving the stress at the crack tip by effectively increasing the
material's compliance, and transformation toughening. [6]
"Transformation toughening" is a phenomenon whereby a material undergoes one or
more martensitic (displacive, diffusionless) phase transformations which result in an almost
instantaneous change in volume of that material. This transformation is triggered by a change in
the stress state of the material, such as an increase in tensile stress, and acts in opposition to the
applied stress. Thus when the material is locally put under tension, for example at the tip of a
growing crack, it can undergo a phase transformation which increases its volume, lowering the
local tensile stress and hindering the crack's progression through the material. This mechanism is
exploited to increase the toughness of ceramic materials, most notably in Yttria-stabilized
zirconia for applications such as ceramic knives and thermal barrier coatings on jet engine turbine
blades.[7]

Fracture toughness testing methods[edit]

Fracture toughness is a critical mechanical property for certain applications. There are several
types of test used to measure fracture toughness of materials.
 Determination of plane strain fracture toughness, KIc[edit]
When a material behaves in a linear elastic way prior to failure, such that the plastic zone is small
compared to the specimen dimension, a critical value of Mode-I stress intensity factor can be an
appropriate fracture parameter. This method provides a quantitative measure of fracture
toughness in terms of the critical plane strain stress intensity factor. The test must be validated
once complete to ensure the results are meaningful. The specimen size is fixed, and must be
large enough to ensure plane strain conditions at the crack tip. This limits the product forms to
which the test can be applied. In the 1960s, it was postulated that small specimens or thin
sections fail under plane stress conditions, and that ‘‘plane strain fracture’’ occurs in thick
sections. The ASTM E 399 test method reflects this viewpoint. Over the years, it has been taken
as an indisputable fact that toughness decreases with increasing specimen size until a plateau is
reached. Specimen size requirements in ASTM E 399 are intended to ensure that
KIc measurements correspond to the supposed plane strain plateau. The specimen size
requirements in this standard are far more stringent than they need to be to ensure predominately
plane strain conditions at the crack tip. The real key to a K-based test method is ensuring that the
specimen fractures under nominally linear elastic conditions. That is, the plastic zone must be
small compared to the specimen cross section. Consequently, the important specimen
dimensions to ensure a valid K test are the crack length a and the ligament length W – a, not the
thickness B. Four specimen configurations are permitted by the current version of E 399: the
compact, SE(B), arc-shaped, and disk-shaped specimens. Specimens for K Ic tests are usually
fabricated with the width W equal to twice the thickness B. They are fatigue precracked so that
the crack length/width ratio (a /W) lies between 0.45 and 0.55. Thus, the specimen design is such
that all of the key dimensions, a, B, and W− a, are approximately equal. This design results in the
efficient use of material, since the standard requires that each of these dimensions must be large
compared to the plastic zone.
Determination of tear resistance (Kahn tear test) [edit]
The tear test (e.g. Kahn tear test) provides a semi-quantitative measure of toughness in terms of
tear resistance. This type of test requires a smaller specimen, and can therefore be used for a
wider range of product forms. The tear test can also be used for very ductile aluminium alloys
(e.g. 1100, 3003), where linear elastic fracture mechanics do not apply (see properties in
practice).
Fracture toughness of AISI steel[edit]
The fracture toughness of AISI 4340 steel has been determined by several methods, i.e.
(i)Jr curve, (ii)δr curve, (iii) Kr curve, (iv) stretch zone size measurements (v) non-linear energy
method of Poulose et al. and by (vi) a new procedure proposed recently by Banerjee. Compact
tension specimens with TL orientation have been used. All the specimens used satisfied the
ASTM E813 test size requirements. Applicability of various fracture toughness estimation
procedures like (i) Hanhn and Rosenfield, (ii) Rolfe and Barsom and (iii) equivalent energy rate
method of Bucci et al. have been examined. These values have been compared with true fracture
toughness of the material obtained by ASTM E399 test procedure. [8]
Comparison of various conventional test methods indicate multiple specimen curve method gives
most consistent results and these values are within +15% of the true fracture toughness value.
Out of all estimation procedures Rolfe and Barsom's method appears to be best, giving number
within +8% of the true fracture toughness value. Non-linear energy method was found to give
a fracture toughness value consistent with true fracture toughness of the material
Other methods for determining fracture toughness[edit]

 C1161 Test Method for Flexural Strength of Advanced Ceramics at Ambient Temperature
 C1322 Practice for Fractography and Characterization of Fracture Origins in Advanced
Ceramics
 E4 Practices for Force Verification of Testing Machines
 E112 Test Methods for Determining Average Grain Size
 E177 Practice for Use of the Terms Precision and Bias in ASTM Test Methods
 E337 Test Method for Measuring Humidity with a Psychrometer (the Measurement of
Wet- and Dry-Bulb Temperatures)
 E399 Test Method for Plain-strain Fracture Toughness of Metallic Materials
 E691 Practice for Conducting an Interlaboratory Study to Determine the Precision of a
Test Method
 E740 Practice for Fracture Testing with Surface-Crack Tension Specimens
 E1823 Terminology Relating to Fatigue and Fracture Testing
 IEEE/ASTM SI 10 Standard for Use of the International System of Units (SI) (The Modern
Metric System)[9]

See also[edit]

 Stress intensity factor

 Puncture resistance
 Fracture mechanics
 Brittle-ductile transition zone
 Charpy impact test
 Impact (mechanics)
 Izod impact strength test
 Toughness of ceramics by indentation
 Shock (mechanics)
 Stress corrosion cracking

References[edit]

1. Jump up^ Hertzberg, Richard W. (December 1995). Deformation and Fracture Mechanics

of Engineering Materials (4 ed.). Wiley. ISBN 0-471-01214-9.
2. Jump up^ Sérgio Francisco dos Santos, José de Anchieta Rodrigues (2003). "Correlation
Between Fracture Toughness, Work of Fracture and Fractal Dimensions of Alumina-Mullite-Zirconia
Composites". Materials Research 6 (2): 219–226. doi:10.1590/s1516-14392003000200017.
3. Jump up^ AR Boccaccini, S Atiq, DN Boccaccini, I Dlouhy, C Kaya (2005). "Fracture
behaviour of mullite fibre reinforced-mullite matrix composites under quasi-static and ballistic impact
loading". Composites Science and Technology 65: 325–333.doi:10.1016/j.compscitech.2004.08.002.
4. Jump up^ J. Phalippou, T. Woignier, R. Rogier (1989). "Fracture toughness of silica
aerogels".Journal de Physique Colloques 50: C4–191. doi:10.1051/jphyscol:1989431.
5. Jump up^ Wei, Robert (2010), Fracture Mechanics: Integration of Mechanics, Materials
Science and Chemistry, Cambridge University Press, retrieved 24 September 2014
6. Jump up^ Liang, Yiling (2010), The toughening mechanism in hybrid epoxy-silica-rubber
nanocomposites, Lehigh University, p. 20, retrieved 24 September 2014
7. Jump up^ Padture, Nitin (12 April 2002). "Thermal Barrier Coatings for Gas-Turbine
Engine Applications". Science 296: 280–284. doi:10.1126/science.1068609.
8. Jump up^ Engineering Fracture Mechanics, Volume 25, Issue 4, 1986

9. Jump up^ NIST SRM 2100 Fracture Toughness of Ceramics

Other references[edit]

 Anderson, T. L., Fracture Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications (CRC Press,

Boston 1995).
 Davidge, R. W., Mechanical Behavior of Ceramics (Cambridge University Press 1979).
 Lawn, B., Fracture of Brittle Solids (Cambridge University Press 1993, 2nd edition).
 Knott, Fundamentals of Fracture Mechanics (1973).
 Foroulis (ed.), Environmentally-Sensitive Fracture of Engineering Materials (1979).
 Suresh, S., Fatigue of Materials (Cambridge University Press 1998, 2nd edition).
 West, J. M., Basic Corrosion & Oxidation (Horwood 1986, 2nd edn), chap.12.
 Green, D. J.; Hannink, R.; Swain, M. V. (1989). Transformation Toughening of Ceramics,
Boca Raton: CRC Press. ISBN 0-8493-6594-5.
 http://www.sv.vt.edu/classes/MSE2094_NoteBook/97ClassProj/exper/gordon/www/fracto
ugh.html
 http://www.springerlink.com/content/v2m7u4qm53172069/fulltext.pdf  sriram

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fracture_toughness