Toughening materials: enhancing resistance to fracture

Abstract

It has been said that ‘God invented plasticity, but the Devil invented fracture!’ Both mechanisms represent the two prime modes of structural failure, respectively, plastic collapse and the rupture/breaking of a component, but the concept of developing materials with enhanced resistance to fracture can be difficult. This is because fracture resistance invariably involves a compromise—between strength and ductility, between strength and toughness—fundamentally leading to a ‘conflict’ between nano-/micro-structural damage and the mechanisms of toughening. Here, we examine the two major classes of such toughening: (i) intrinsic toughening , which occurs ahead of a crack tip and is motivated by plasticity—this is the principal mode of fracture resistance in ductile materials, and (ii) extrinsic toughening , which occurs at, or in the wake of, a crack tip and is associated with crack-tip shielding—this is generally the sole mode of fracture resistance in brittle materials. We briefly examine how these distinct mechanistic processes have been used to toughen synthetic materials—intrinsically in gradient materials and in multiple principal-element metallic alloys with the example of metallic glasses and high-entropy alloys, and extrinsically in ceramics with the example of ceramic-matrix composites—in comparison to Nature which has been especially adept in creating biological/natural materials which are toughened by one or both mechanistic classes, despite often consisting of constituents with meagre mechanical properties. The success of Nature has been driven by its ability to cultivate the development of materials with multiple length-scale hierarchical structures that display ingenious gradients and structural adaptability, a philosophy which we need to emulate and more importantly learn to synthesize to make structural materials of the future with unprecedented combinations of mechanical properties. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘A cracking approach to inventing new tough materials: fracture stranger than friction’.

Inhibiting weld cracking in high-strength aluminium alloys

“…This is because in this region the primary crack has to deflect to continue to propagate due to the curved and discontinuous nature of the FQZ. As a result, the gradient structure (mixture of FQZ and WM) near the fusion boundary for the OSHW + m weld displays a higher cracking resistance compared to conventional HLAW having a straight FQZ 24 .…”

Recent developments and perspectives of advanced high-strength medium Mn steel: from material design to failure mechanisms

“…The Ashby maps of YS versus fracture toughness or impact toughness shown in figure 13 clearly demonstrate the strength-toughness trade-off [62,83]. Many promising approaches have been proposed to achieve an excellent synergy of strength and toughness [84,85]. Among these approaches, tailoring the fraction and stability of metastable retained austenite (i.e.…”

Mechanically Robust Skin-like Poly(urethane-urea) Elastomers Cross-Linked with Hydrogen-Bond Arrays and Their Application as High-Performance Ultrastretchable Conductors

“…Therefore, we believe that endowing artificial elastomers with skin-like properties, such as damage resistance, damage tolerance, and healability, would be a feasible and effective strategy for fabricating high-performance elastomers. Recently, scientists have developed various biomimetic elastomers with skin-like performance by integrating healing and damage tolerance properties into elastomers. ,,,,− Our group reported on a healable, damage tolerant, and highly elastic elastomer with a tensile strength of ∼52.4 MPa and fracture energy of ∼192.9 kJ m –2 , which was constructed by cross-linking multiblock polyurethane with well-designed dynamic hierarchical domains containing hydrogen bonds, coordination bonds, and polycaprolactone (PCL) crystals . Liu et al fabricated a healable and mechanically robust elastomer with a tensile strength of ∼58 MPa and a fracture energy of ∼320 kJ m –2 by cross-linking waterborne polyurethane with multiple hydrogen and ionic bonds .…”