1986
DOI: 10.1016/0013-7944(86)90101-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detection and measurement of crack closure and opening by an ultrasonic method

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1990
1990
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, when the stress is removed, the residual plastic region may force the crack close fully at the crack tip [2]. However, many experiments show the difficulties in measuring the crack-opening load, depending on the measuring location [5] and the techniques employed, such as by electrical potential method [6], by ultrasonic method [7] [8], and numerical method [9]. Further, it is found that commonly employed notch-mouth clip-gauge method is not sensitive enough to detect the closure of short cracks in regions of notch plasticity [10] and changes in the stresses ahead of the crack tip are more important than closure behind the crack tip [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Moreover, when the stress is removed, the residual plastic region may force the crack close fully at the crack tip [2]. However, many experiments show the difficulties in measuring the crack-opening load, depending on the measuring location [5] and the techniques employed, such as by electrical potential method [6], by ultrasonic method [7] [8], and numerical method [9]. Further, it is found that commonly employed notch-mouth clip-gauge method is not sensitive enough to detect the closure of short cracks in regions of notch plasticity [10] and changes in the stresses ahead of the crack tip are more important than closure behind the crack tip [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Moreover, when the stress is removed, the residual plastic region may force the crack close fully at the crack tip (Wolf, 1970). However, many experiments show the difficulties in measuring the crack-opening load, depending on the measuring location (Macha, Corbly, & Jones, 1979) and the techniques employed, such as by electrical potential method (Shih and Wei 1974), by ultrasonic method (Bouami & De Vadder, 1986;Singh, Srivastav, Gupta, Keller, & Ray, 2009), and numerical method (Riddell, Piascik, Sutton, Zhao, McNeill & Helm, 1999). Further, it is found that commonly employed notchmouth clip-gauge method is not sensitive enough to detect the closure of short cracks in regions of notch plasticity (Fleck & Shin, 1985) and changes in the stresses ahead of the crack tip are more important than closure behind the crack tip (Sadananda, 1999).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Preventive measures are necessary if the flaw is a fatigue crack, but immediate measures are not needed if it proves to be a flaw remaining after manufacturing. One common NDT method used to characterize flaws and identify fatigue cracks is detecting the fluctuations of ultrasonic echoes due to crack tip closure under stress fluctuations 1) .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%