MECHANICAL FAILURE

ISSUES TO ADDRESS...
• How do flaws in a material initiate failure?
• How is fracture resistance quantified; how do different
material classes compare?
• How do we estimate the stress to fracture?

Ship-cyclic loading Computer chip-cyclic Hip implant-cyclic

from waves.
Adapted from Fig. 8.0, Callister 6e.
(Fig. 8.0 is by Neil Boenzi, The New
York Times.)
thermal loading. loading from walking.
Adapted from Fig. 18.11W(b), Callister Adapted from Fig.
6e. (Fig. 18.11W(b) is courtesy of 17.19(b), Callister 6e.
National Semiconductor Corporation.)
1
 DUCTILE VS BRITTLE FAILURE
• Classification:
Fracture Very Moderately
Brittle
behavior: Ductile Ductile

%AR or %EL : Large Moderate Small

• Ductile Ductile: Brittle:
fracture is warning before No
desirable! fracture warning
2
 EX: FAILURE OF A PIPE

• Ductile failure:
--one piece
--large deformation

• Brittle failure:
--many pieces
--small deformation

Figures from V.J. Colangelo and F.A.

Heiser, Analysis of Metallurgical
Failures (2nd ed.), Fig. 4.1(a) and (b),
p. 66 John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1987.
Used with permission.

3
 DUCTILE FRACTURE

Rogers was a Professor and Department Head at Drexel from 1970-1990

JOM,
It made the Titanic sink ☺
50 (1) (1998), pp. 12-18.
 MODERATELY DUCTILE
FAILURE
• Evolution to failure:
void void growth shearing
necking fracture
nucleation and linkage at surface
σ

• Resulting 50μm
50 μm
fracture
surfaces
(steel)
100 μm
particles From V.J. Colangelo and F.A. Heiser, Fracture surface of tire cord wire
serve as void Analysis of Metallurgical Failures loaded in tension. Courtesy of F.
(2nd ed.), Fig. 11.28, p. 294, John Roehrig, CC Technologies,
nucleation Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1987. (Orig. Dublin, OH.
sites. source: P. Thornton, J. Mater. Sci.,
Vol. 6, 1971, pp. 347-56.) 4
 BRITTLE FRACTURE SURFACES
• Intergranular
(between grains) 304 S. Steel
(metal)
Reprinted w/permission from
"Metals Handbook", 9th ed, Fig.
633, p. 650. Copyright 1985, ASM
International, Materials Park, OH.
(Micrograph by J.R. Keiser and A.R.
Olsen, Oak Ridge National Lab.)
4 mm
Polypropylene
(polymer)
Reprinted w/ permission from
R.W. Hertzberg, "Defor-mation
and Fracture Mechanics of
Engineering Materials", (4th ed.)
Fig. 7.35(d), p. 303, John Wiley
and Sons, Inc., 1996.
1 mm
(Orig. source: K. Friedrick, Fracture 1977,
Vol. 3, ICF4, Waterloo, CA, 1977, p. 1119.)
• Intragranular
(within grains)
316 S. Steel
(metal)
Reprinted w/ permission from
"Metals Handbook", 9th ed, Fig.
650, p. 357. Copyright 1985, ASM
International, Materials Park, OH.
(Micrograph by D.R. Diercks,
Argonne National Lab.)
160μm
Al Oxide
(ceramic)
Reprinted w/ permission from
"Failure Analysis of Brittle
Materials", p. 78. Copyright 1990,
The American Ceramic Society,
Westerville, OH. (Micrograph by
R.M. Gruver and H. Kirchner.)
3μm
5
BRITTLE FAILURE
Examples: Refractory oxides (ceramics), intermetallics, BCC metals at low
temperature (below about ¼ of the melting point).
• Very little plastic flow prior to failure;
• The two sides of the fracture surface fit together well after
failure.
• The fracture surface appears faceted – you distinguish
individual grains and atomic planes.
• In some materials, fracture occurs along certain
crystallographic planes. In others, fracture occurs along grain
boundaries

DUCTILE FAILURE
Examples: FCC metals at all temperatures; BCC metals at high
temperatures; polymers at high temperature.
• Extensive plastic flow occurs in the material prior to fracture
• There is usually evidence of considerable necking in the
specimen
• Fracture surfaces don’t fit together.
• The fracture surface has a dimpled appearance – you can see
little holes, often with second phase particles inside them.
 Ductile vs Brittle Fracture
A designer point of view
• Ductile: Basically we design against yielding.
– “Internal defects” that reduce yield strength can be taken into
account by the introduction of a safety factor
– Reduction of strength due to internal defects is not “excessive”,
unless the defects are of “large” dimensions compared to the
cross section
– Statistical variation of properties of parts from a well controlled
process is limited.
– Visible deformation before failure is an effective warning
mechanism
• Brittle:
– Statistical variation of properties of parts may be significant.
– Reduction of strength due to internal defects is significant,
defects need to be taken into account and directly or indirectly
“measured”
– The “sudden” nature of the event makes this type of failure very
dangerous
 EARLY STUDIES IN BRITTLE FRACTURE

• DaVinci (500 yrs ago!) observed...

--the longer the wire, the
smaller the load to fail it.
• Reasons:
--flaws cause premature failure.
--Larger samples “are more flawed”!

Code Atlanticus 16th century

6
Before fracture mechanics
There was the Charpy test

ASTM E23-07ae1 Standard

Test Methods for Notched
Bar Impact Testing of
Metallic Materials

We get an energy absorbed

during fracture.

Results vary depending on the

details of the notch – comparison
of materials is tricky
 Success stories of the Charpy test

BDTT=Brittle to ductile Irradiation effects

temperature transition
Old nuclear reactors are deemed safe
based on Charpy specimens that were
stored in the reactor when the reactor
was installed

Initially design for 10-20 years some of

these reactors have lasted for 30-40 years.
The Charpy specimens are running out.
TODAY WE KNOW BETTER

WE USE FRACTURE MECHANICS

 IDEAL VS REAL MATERIALS

E By considering the
F
maximum force per bond
Fmax we calculate that the ideal
strength is about E/10

a a

Griffith (1920)

~4GPa compare to Young’s

modulus E=70GPa for glass
Ideal strength (newer calculations)

IN REALITY WE
ARE FAR BELOW
 FLAWS ARE STRESS
CONCENTRATORS!
• Elliptical hole in • Maximum stress at the tip
a plate:
σo ⎛ a⎞
σ max = σ ⎜1 + 2 ⎟
⎝ b⎠
σ a = b ⇒ σ max = 3σ
a = 10b ⇒ σ max = 21σ
2a
a
ρ = b /a ⇔ a/b =
2

ρ
⎛ a⎞ a
σ max = σ ⎜⎜1 + 2 ⎟ ≈ 2σ
⎟ ( a >> ρ )
⎝ ρ ⎠ ρ
For sharp cracks
stress → ∞ 7
WHEN DOES A CRACK PROPAGATE?

• ρ at a crack • Result: crack tip

tip is very stress is very large.
small!

A.A. Griffith (1920) said:

A crack will propagate if the energy released is larger

than the energy spent during the propagation of the crack
 An analogy

• If you blow a balloon that has a hole, initially

the balloon does not break.
The energy released if the balloon breaks is
not large enough to compensate for the
energy required to create a tear in the
balloon.

• But if the balloon has a high pressure (and a

lot of stored energy) then a small defect can
make it pop. A lot of energy is released
that can compensate for the energy
required to create a tear in the balloon.
 σ σ
A B
A

2a
2a 2a
2a

Energy difference between the two configurations

The presence of the crack in A creates an area
(approximately circular) around the crack that is nearly 2 2
πσ a t
stress free. The difference in elastic energy from B is:
E
At the same time there is extra surface energy in A due to
the crack: 4atγ S
 Energy versus crack size
UA
Stable Unstable

πσ 2 a 2t
UA =UB + − + 4atγ S
E

aCR a
dU A 2πσ 2 aCR t πσ 2 aCR
=0⇒− + 4tγ S = 0 ⇒ = 2γ S
da E E

a < aCR crack is stable (does not tend to grow)

a > aCR crack grows
 Alternatively

2γ S E
σ FAILURE =
πa

For an existing crack of size 2a there is a stress that makes

this crack critical
 WHEN DOES A CRACK PROPAGATE?
• Crack propagates when the elastic released due to
crack growth is higher than the surface energy
created by the additional crack surface (Griffith’s
criterion for
brittle materials – Linear elastic
fracture mechanics)
F
2 Eγ S
σ critical =
πa
a σ=
F
σ12π3
a = 2 Eγ S
wt
K
123
KC
w
t γ S = surface energy 9
WHEN DOES A CRACK PROPAGATE?

σ πa = 2γ S E
Stress
Intensity Fracture
Factor Toughness
K KC

Load and Material

Geometry Dependent
dependent 9
 FRACTURE TOUGHNESS
• Condition for crack propagation:
K = Kc
Stress Intensity Factor: Fracture Toughness:
--Depends on load & --Depends on the material,
geometry. temperature, environment, &
rate of loading.
• Values of K for some standard loads & geometries:
σ σ
units of K :
MPa m
2a a
2a or ksi in
Adapted from Fig. 8.8,
Callister 6e.

K = σ πa K = 1.1σ πa
10
 FRACTURE TOUGHNESS metals
Kc

increasing
Graphite/
Metals/ Composites/
Alloys
Ceramics/ Polymers
fibers comp
Semicond Kc
100
C-C(|| fibers)1
70 Steels cer≈ poly
60 Ti alloys
Kc Kc
50
40
Al alloys
30 Mg alloys Based on data in Table B5,
KIc(MPa · m0.5)

Callister 6e.
20 Composite reinforcement geometry
Al/Al oxide(sf) 2
is: f = fibers; sf = short fibers; w =
Y 2O 3/ZrO2(p)4 whiskers; p = particles. Addition
10 C/C( fibers)1 data as noted (vol. fraction of
Al oxid/SiC(w)3 reinforcement):
Diamond Si nitr/SiC(w)5
7 Al oxid/ZrO2(p)4
1. (55vol%) ASM Handbook, Vol. 21, ASM
6 Int., Materials Park, OH (2001) p. 606.
Si carbide Glass/SiC(w)6 2. (55 vol%) Courtesy J. Cornie, MMC, Inc.,
5 Al oxide PET
Si nitride Waltham, MA.
4 3. (30 vol%) P.F. Becher et al., Fracture
PP
Mechanics of Ceramics, Vol. 7, Plenum
3 PVC Press (1986). pp. 61-73.
4. Courtesy CoorsTek, Golden, CO.
2 PC 5. (30 vol%) S.T. Buljan et al., "Development
of Ceramic Matrix Composites for
Application in Technology for Advanced
Engines Program", ORNL/Sub/85-22011/2,
1 ORNL, 1992.
<100>
Si crystal PS Glass6 6. (20vol%) F.D. Gace et al., Ceram. Eng.
<111> Sci. Proc., Vol. 7 (1986) pp. 978-82.
0.7 Glass-soda
0.6 Polyester
Concrete 11
0.5
Geometry factor Y

K = Y σ πa
 DESIGN AGAINST CRACK
GROWTH
• Crack growth condition: K = Kc

Yσ πa
• Largest, most stressed cracks grow first!
--Result 1: Max flaw size --Result 2: Design stress
dictates design stress. dictates max. flaw size.
Kc 1 ⎛ Kc ⎞ 2
σdesign < a max < ⎜ ⎜ ⎟
Y πa max π ⎝ Yσdesign ⎟⎠
amax
σ
fracture fracture
no no
fracture amax fracture σ
12
How do we know what is the crack size?

By inspection

- magnetic particles
- liquid dye penetrant
- ultrasound
- electromagnetic (eddy current)
- X-ray

All methods have a detection limit

Design assumes that if cracks are not detected –

cracks of the order of the detection limit are present
normal to the maximum principal stress.
PLANE STRAIN vs. PLANE STRESS
 PLANE STRAIN
FRACTURE TOUGHNESS KIC

We focus on KIC
because it is a
true material
property
(i.e., it does not
depend on
geometry of the
specimen)
FRACTURE TOUGHNESS
TESTING

ASTM 399
FRACTURE TOUGHNESS TESTING

P95% /PQ<1.1
maxslope

BUT …
 Validity
• Sharp crack – fatigue generated

• Plane strain?
2.5(K/σY)2 << thickness, crack size, (specimen
width – crack size) and half height?

• Small scale yielding? (will explain soon)

We need to know the result of the test apriori to

know whether the test is valid or not.
 Small scale yielding?

• Griffiths approach needs to be modified:

2 E (γ S + γ plasticity )
σ critical =
πa

In addition to the surface energy term, the

irreversible energy lost due to plasticity
needs to be considered.
 γplasticity=dWp/da

a a+da
 What about fracture toughness of
ductile materials?

• A design approach for ductile materials exists

(J-integral) but it is mathematically complex
(albeit extremely important in applications
such as aerospace engineering)
• We can apply the Griffith’s theory (Linear
elastic fracture mechanics ) if yielding of the
material occurs at small scale.
Stress field around a crack
y
loaded in Mode I r
θ

x
 Small scale yielding

Plastic Zone Size

Plane Strain
2
1 ⎛K ⎞
rY = ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
6π ⎝σY ⎠

Plain Stress

In order to apply LEFM we need to make sure that the

plastic zone rY is small:

4rY<<a and 4rY<<w-a, 4rY<<h

Why small scale yielding is needed for valid testing?

Plastically
yielded area
bad around crack tip OK
 Summary of conditions

• Sharp crack
• Pmax/PQ<1.1
• Plane strain
• Small scale yielding

• If not iterate with larger specimen

Mode II
Mode III
 Mode superposition

• Stresses from different modes can be

superimposed outside the plastic zone.

• Complex mode criteria exist but are out of

scope here.
 Homework I

1. Compute the stresses (normalized by KI/(2πa)0.5

around a crack loading in plane strain and mode I at:
θ=0, 45, 90, 135, and 180o . Draw the principal
directions of stress in each location.
2. Find two examples of inclusions with significant
differences of strength than the surrounding matrix
(one harder inclusion and one softer than the
matrix). Provide data (with references of the
strength of each phase, i.e., inclusion and matrix).
Photos are welcome.
3. Find as many as possible online, fully readable
textbooks and handbooks on fracture and fatigue
that exist in our library (In about 10 minutes I found
8; see if you can find more ☺ ).