1998
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0207(19980830)42:8<1463::aid-nme429>3.0.co;2-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Three-dimensional interaction between a crack front and particles

Abstract: The three-dimensional interaction of a crack front with particles is investigated under mode-I loading. The J-integral is applied to characterize the crack-inclusion interactions. Numerical examples are presented, using 20 node, isoparametric finite elements, for the compact tension specimen and elastic materials. The J-integral is calculated for various moduli of the particles, distances of the crack from the interface and particle size. The problem of the crack penetrating a cluster of particles is discussed… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 30 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Analytical approaches have been developed to calculate the near-tip stress field, stress intensity factors (SIFs) and the configurational force for a crack in the vicinity of an inclusion (Atkinson 1972;Erdogan et al 1974;Faber and Evans 1983a;Gdoutos 1985;Han and Chen 2000;Hwu et al 1995;Li and Lv 2017;Li and Yang 2004;Rubinstein 1991;Sendeckyj 1974;Tamate 1968;Zhou and Li 2007;Zhou et al 2011). Simulations using finite element method (FEM) have been performed to evaluate the SIF and energy release rate (ERR) for a stationary crack interacting with an inclusion (Haddi and Weichert 1998;Li and Chudnovsky 1993a;Li and Chudnovsky 1993b;Lipetzky and Knesl 1995;Lipetzky and Schmauder 1994). In order to predict the trajectory and associated ERR of a propagating crack, various numerical techniques have been developed and applied, including boundary element method (BEM) (Bush 1997; Kitey et al 2006;Knight et al 2002;Lei et al 2005;Wang et al 1998;Wang and Chau 2001), extended finite element method (XFEM) (Nielsen et al 2012;Wang et al 2018; Wang et al 2012;Wang et al 2015), element-free Galerkin (EFG) method (Muthu et al 2013;Muthu et al 2016) and cohesive zone type models (CZM) (Ponnusami et al 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Analytical approaches have been developed to calculate the near-tip stress field, stress intensity factors (SIFs) and the configurational force for a crack in the vicinity of an inclusion (Atkinson 1972;Erdogan et al 1974;Faber and Evans 1983a;Gdoutos 1985;Han and Chen 2000;Hwu et al 1995;Li and Lv 2017;Li and Yang 2004;Rubinstein 1991;Sendeckyj 1974;Tamate 1968;Zhou and Li 2007;Zhou et al 2011). Simulations using finite element method (FEM) have been performed to evaluate the SIF and energy release rate (ERR) for a stationary crack interacting with an inclusion (Haddi and Weichert 1998;Li and Chudnovsky 1993a;Li and Chudnovsky 1993b;Lipetzky and Knesl 1995;Lipetzky and Schmauder 1994). In order to predict the trajectory and associated ERR of a propagating crack, various numerical techniques have been developed and applied, including boundary element method (BEM) (Bush 1997; Kitey et al 2006;Knight et al 2002;Lei et al 2005;Wang et al 1998;Wang and Chau 2001), extended finite element method (XFEM) (Nielsen et al 2012;Wang et al 2018; Wang et al 2012;Wang et al 2015), element-free Galerkin (EFG) method (Muthu et al 2013;Muthu et al 2016) and cohesive zone type models (CZM) (Ponnusami et al 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%