Static and dynamic analysis of the DCB problem in fracture mechanics

Shmuely, M.; Peretz, D.

doi:10.1016/0020-7683(76)90073-1

Cited by 35 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2, node 125 at position (HI2, L) is subjected to a prescribed lateral displacement of H. This lateral steady-state displacement is consistent with the values assumed in Refs. [2] and [3] and is employed here for comparison purposes. It should be noted however that it is far in excess of normal experimental values.…”

Section: Damping Matrixmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kanninen [1,2] simulated the dynamic case by including transverse shear as well as lateral inertia effects in a Timoshenko beam model supported on a generalised elastic foundation and adopted an energy balance criterion for crack propagation. Shmuely and Peretz [3], adopting a critical stress criterion, employed finite differences for both time and spatial discretisation in their twodimensional solution. Kobayashi and Mall [4], investigated the problem with the aid of a dynamic photoelastic model.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Numerical study of dynamic crack growth by the finite element method

Owen

Shantaram

1977

Int J Fract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent developments in numerical techniques for dynamic transient stress analysis have ensured that realistic models can now be employed in crack propagation studies. In this paper transient dynamic finite element solutions are undertaken for both double cantilever beam (DCB) and pipeline problems with propagation of the crack being permitted. Standard parabolic isoparametric elements are employed for spatial discretization with an explicit (central difference) scheme being employed for time integration. Both critical stress and energy balance crack propagation criteria are considered.The pressurised pipeline problem is solved for as a fully three-dimensional solid. Firstly, a stationary crack is considered and both large deformations and plasticity effects are accounted for. The transient case of a dynamically propagating crack is then modelled, employing both a stress and energy criterion. Elastic large deformation behaviour is permitted for this case.

show abstract

Section: Damping Matrixmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical study of dynamic crack growth by the finite element method

Owen

Shantaram

1977

Int J Fract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…l(a) which has been shown to be capable of characterizing different fracture parameters not only in the quasistatic [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] but also in the dynamic crack propagation [13][14][15][16][17]. Additional reason why the DCB specimen has gained increasing acceptance in fracture studies may be attributed to the fact that the specimen geometry can be readily approximated by a simplified analytical treatment through the use of the beam-on-elastic foundation (BEF) model [12][13][14][15][16][17][18]. The treatment was first advocated by Kanninen [12] who proposed the representation of the cracked DCB specimen with a finite length beam to be partly free and partly supported by an elastic foundation (Fig.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture studies with DCB specimen

Chow

Woo

1980

Int J Fract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An unifying approach for the I)CB specimen with or without the introduction of a groove is presented. The analysis is based on the beam-on-elastic foundation models. Equations are derived for the determination of the foundation modulus for both the groove and beam-foundation models. It is found that the choice of the foundation models used for the evaluation of the fracture toughness should be made on the specimen geometry in terms of the ratios of the specimen thickness and height.Assumptions used in the elastic foundation models are examined and observed that these can be reasonably satisfied by the DCB specimen with the groove height of 1 mm and the thickness ratio of b/B less than 0.25. Notationa Crack length A Area of crack surface b Groove thickness B Specimen thickness c W -a E Modulus of elasticity G Strain Energy Release Rate Gc Fracture toughness h Groove height H DCB beam height ! Second moment of area k Modulus of elastic foundation P Load v Displacement vp Displacement at load point W Overall specimen length a,/3, 0, 3' Constants of the foundation modulus ~ry Normal stress in the y-direction Ey Strain in the y-direction h Reciprocal of characteristic length1. I n t r o d u c t i o n L i n e a r elastic fracture m e c h a n i c s ( L E F M ) has n o w b e e n well accepted b y e n g i n e e r s as a useful design m e t h o d o l o g y for the a s s e s s m e n t of structural integrity and materials selection. In the a p p l i c a t i o n of the L E F M , it is n e c e s s a r y for the e n g i n e e r s to acquire reliable value of the c r a c k r e s i s t a n c e p a r a m e t e r k n o w n as the f r a c t u r e t o u g h n e s s (Go)

show abstract

“…In (i), (2), and (3), U~ and a(T) are the displacement in the Z direction and the crack length a(t), normalized to an arbitrarily chosen m~it of length H, say, for convenience, the height of the specimen investigated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…t is a parameter by which the code is switched over from the static problem solving phase (~ > O) to the dynamic phase (~ = 0) [2]. The dots over ~ designate differentiation with respect to ~.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%