Skip to main content
Log in

Multiscale cohesive zone model for propagation of segmented crack fronts in mode I+III fracture

  • Special Invited Article Celebrating IJF at 50
  • Published:
International Journal of Fracture Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Quasistatic crack propagation in mixed-mode I+III fracture is widely observed to be unstable, the instability being characterized by the segmentation of the parent crack into a periodic array of daughter cracks shaped as flat facets rotated towards the principal stress axis. While there has been recent progress to characterize this instability, no global theory is presently available to describe all aspects of the propagation of the segmented front, including both “local” features like the angle of rotation of the facets and the ratio of their width to their spacing, and “global” ones like the effective energy-release-rate of the segmented crack front and the tendency of the facets to coarsen. This paper embarks on the development of such a theory, based on the assumption that the spacing of the facets is much smaller than their length, and asymptotic matching of outer and inner solutions for the mechanical fields on scales comparable to the facet length and spacing, respectively. The inner problem is shown to reduce to a 2D linear elastic fracture mechanics problem in the plane perpendicular to the crack propagation axis. The solution of this problem is used to develop an effective cohesive zone description of the crack front on a scale much larger than the facet spacing. Such a description leads to a system of 1D integral equations for the outer mechanical fields on the cohesive zone, which may be solved numerically. Numerical examples are given that notably illustrate the prediction of the effective energy-release-rate of the segmented crack front in terms of the various geometrical parameters; this energy-release-rate is predicted to be smaller for a segmented front than for the parent planar front, with the conclusion that segmentation acts as a toughening mechanism. Implications upon the phenomenon of facet coarsening are also briefly discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A good example is Fleck (1991)’s numerical solution, which unfortunately disregards the influence of the stress parallel to the crack front.

  2. This makes no difference on the results, because the difference between the two situations corresponds to a mere uniform stress field \(\sigma _{33}\), which has no influence whatsoever on the SIF.

  3. This will not raise any ambiguity since no further reference will be made to the variations \(\Delta [u_1]_L^R\) and \(\Delta [u_2]_L^R\), which are both zero.

  4. Their representation in Fig. 3 is only schematic since they should have sharp tips instead of square ones, and reach a stationary orientation after a certain distance of propagation.

  5. The \(X^{-1/2}\) behavior of \(p\) and \(q\) is also necessary in view of the finiteness of \([\![U_Y]\!]\) and \([\![U_Z]\!]\) at \(X=0\) which implies, via Eqs. (46) and (47), that \(K_I^{(0)}/\sqrt{2\pi X}-p\) and \(K_{III}^{(0)}/\sqrt{2\pi X}-q\) must remain bounded in the limit \(X\rightarrow 0\).

  6. Note that the behaviors of the functions \(f_L\), \(g_L\) on the one hand, \(f_R\), \(g_R\) on the other hand, when their arguments \(X/d\), \((a-X)/d\) go to zero, are different: \(f_L\), \(g_L\) diverge like the inverse square root of their argument (since \(p\), \(q\) diverge like \(X^{-1/2}\) for small \(X\)) while \(f_R\), \(g_R\) go to finite limits (since \(p\), \(q\) take finite values at \(X=a\)). These different behaviors explain the different prefactors in the asymptotic expressions of these functions, \(d^{-1/2}\) for \(f_L\), \(g_L\), \(a^{-1/2}\) for \(f_R\), \(g_R\).

  7. The linear dependence of \(d\) upon \(X\) is in fact the only one warranting such a condition; it may indeed be checked that if \(d\) increases, more generally, like \(X^{\gamma }\) where \(\gamma \) is some positive exponent, \(G\) is independent of \(a\) if and only if \(\gamma \) is unity.

References

  • Bourdin B, Francfort GA, Marigo JJ (2000) Numerical experiments in revisited brittle fracture. J Mech Phys Solids 48:797–826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke ML, Pollard DD (1996) Fracture propagation paths under mixed-mode loading within rectangular blocks of polymethyl methacrylate. J Geophys Res 101:3387–3400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotterell B, Rice JR (1980) Slightly curved or kinked cracks. Int J Fract 16:155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleck N (1991) Brittle fracture due to an array of microcracks. Proc R Soc Lond A 432:55–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao H, Rice JR (1986) Shear stress intensity factors for planar crack with slightly curved front. ASME J Appl Mech 53:774–778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein RV, Osipenko NM (2012) Successive development of the structure of a fracture near the front of a longitudinal shear crack. Doklady Phys 57:281–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein RV, Salganik RL (1974) Brittle fracture of solids with arbitrary cracks. Int J Fract 10:507–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gradshteyn IS, Ryzhik IM (1980) Table of integrals, series, and products. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith AA (1921) The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids. Phil Trans R Soc Lond Ser A 221:163–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakim V, Karma A (2009) Laws of crack motion and phase-field models of fracture. J Mech Phys Solids 57:342–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hourlier F, Pineau A (1979) Fissuration par fatigue sous sollicitations polymodales (mode I ondulé + mode III permanent) d’un acier pour rotors 26NCDV14. Mémoires Scientifiques de la Revue de Métallurgie 76:175–185 (in French)

    Google Scholar 

  • Karma A, Kessler DA, Levine H (2001) Phase-field model of mode III dynamic fracture. Phys Rev Lett 87:045501 [4 pages]

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knauss WG (1970) An observation of crack propagation in antiplane shear. Int J Fract 6:183–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Koiter WT (1959) An infinite row of parallel cracks in an infinite elastic sheet. Ing Arch 28:168–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus V (1997) Quelques problèmes tridimensionnels de mécanique de la rupture fragile. Ph.D. Thesis, Université Pierre et Marie Curie (Paris VI), France (in French)

  • Lazarus V, Leblond JB, Mouchrif SE (2001) Crack front rotation and segmentation in mixed-mode I+III or I+II+III—Part II: Comparison with experiments. J Mech Phys Solids 49:1421–1443

  • Lazarus V, Buchholz FG, Fulland M, Wiebesiek J (2008) Comparison of predictions by mode II or mode III criteria on crack front twisting in three or four point bending experiments. Int J Fract 153:141–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leblond JB, Frelat J (2014) Development of fracture facets from a crack loaded in mode I+III: solution and application of a model 2D problem. J Mech Phys Solids 64:133–153

  • Leblond JB, Lazarus V (2015) On the strong influence of imperfections upon the quick deviation of a mode I+III crack from coplanarity. J Mech Mater Struct (to appear)

  • Leblond JB, Karma A, Lazarus V (2011) Theoretical analysis of crack front instability in mode I+III. J Mech Phys Solids 59:1872–1887. Erratum, 68:210 (2014)

  • Leguillon D (1993) Asymptotic and numerical analysis of crack branching in non-isotropic materials. Eur J Mech A/Solids 12:33–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin B, Mear ME, Ravi-Chandar K (2010) Criterion for initiation of cracks under mixed-mode I+III loading. Int J Fract 165:175–188

  • Maurini C, Bourdin B, Gauthier G, Lazarus V (2013) Crack patterns obtained by unidirectional drying of a colloidal suspension in a capillary tube: experiments and numerical simulations using a two-dimensional variational approach. Int J Fract 184:75–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melin S (1983) Why do cracks avoid each other? Int J Fract 23:37–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Movchan AB, Gao H, Willis JR (1998) On perturbations of plane cracks. Int J Solids Struct 35:3419–3453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muskhelishvili NI (1953) Some basic problems of the mathematical theory of elasticity. Noordhoff, Groningen

    Google Scholar 

  • Palaniswamy K, Knauss WG (1975) Crack extension in brittle solids. In: Nemat-Nasser (ed) Mechanics today, vol 4. Pergamon Press, New York, pp 87–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Pham KH, Ravi-Chandar K (2014) Further examination of the criterion for crack initiation under mixed-mode I+III loading. Int J Fract 189:121–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollard DD, Aydin A (1988) Progress in understanding jointing over the past century. Geol Soc Am Bull 100:1181–1204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollard DD, Segall P, Delaney PT (1982) Formation and interpretation of dilatant echelon cracks. Geol Soc Am Bull 93:1291–1303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pons AJ, Karma A (2010) Helical crack-front instability in mixed-mode fracture. Nature 464:85–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronsin O, Caroli C, Baumberger T (2014) Crack front echelon instability in mixed-mode fracture of a strongly nonlinear elastic solid. Europhys Lett 105:34001 (6 pages)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Hubert J, Sanchez-Palencia E (1992) Introduction aux méthodes asymptotiques et à l’homogénéisation. Masson, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommer E (1969) Formation of fracture “lances” in glass. Eng Fract Mech 1:539–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suresh S, Tschegg EK (1987) Combined mode I–mode III fracture of fatigue-precracked alumina. J Am Ceram Soc 70:726–733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yates JR, Miller KJ (1989) Mixed-mode (I+III) fatigue thresholds in a forging steel. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 12:259–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Vincent Hakim, of Ecole Normale Superieure, for illuminating discussions. The financial support of Institut Universitaire de France (JBL and VL), ANR GeoSMEC, Contract 2012-BS06-0016-03 (VL) and US DOE Grant DEFG02-07ER46400 (AK) is also gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean-Baptiste Leblond.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Approximate expressions of the functions \(F_{ij}^{p}\)

The approximate expressions of the functions \(F_{ij}^{p}(c/d\,,\alpha )\) proposed by Leblond and Frelat (2014) (in the sole case \(c<d\)) are as follows:

$$\begin{aligned} \left\{ \begin{array}{l} \displaystyle F^I_{11}\left( \frac{c}{d},\,\alpha \right) \simeq \frac{1-\cos (2\alpha )}{2\sqrt{\cos \alpha }};\\ \displaystyle F^I_{22}\left( \frac{c}{d},\,\alpha \right) \simeq \frac{1+\cos (2\alpha )}{2\sqrt{\cos \alpha }}; \\ \displaystyle F^I_{12}\left( \frac{c}{d},\,\alpha \right) \simeq - \left[ 3 + \frac{\pi c/d}{\sin (\pi c/d)} \right] \frac{\sin (2\alpha )}{4\sqrt{\cos \alpha }}; \\ \displaystyle F^{II}_{11}\left( \frac{c}{d},\,\alpha \right) \simeq - \frac{\sin (2\alpha )}{2\sqrt{\cos \alpha }};\\ \displaystyle F^{II}_{22}\left( \frac{c}{d},\,\alpha \right) \simeq \left[ 3 - \frac{\pi c/d}{\sin (\pi c/d)} \right] \frac{\sin (2\alpha )}{4\sqrt{\cos \alpha }}; \\ \displaystyle F^{II}_{12}\left( \frac{c}{d},\,\alpha \right) \simeq \frac{\cos (2\alpha )}{\sqrt{\cos \alpha }}\,. \\ \end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$
(62)

These formulae present the following nice features:

  • for small values of \(\alpha \) but arbitrary values of \(c/d\,(<1)\), they match the exact first-order solution in \(\alpha \) (Melin 1983; Leblond and Frelat 2014);

  • for infinitesimal values of \(c/d\) but arbitrary values of \(\alpha \), they again match the exact, trivial solution corresponding to isolated cracks;

  • they yield acceptable results in all cases except when \(\alpha \) and \(c/d\) are simultaneously large (see Leblond and Frelat 2014’s comparisons with the results of some finite element calculations).

Appendix 2: Approximate expressions of the coefficients \({{\mathcal {A}}}_{\lambda \mu }\)

Approximate expressions of the coefficients \({{\mathcal {A}}}_{\lambda \mu }\) may be derived using their definition (18) and the approximate expressions (62) of the functions \(F_{ij}^{p}\). All integrals involved reduce to elementary integrals plus a single, non-elementary one defined by

$$\begin{aligned} J(u) \equiv \int _0^u \frac{v^2}{\sin v}\,{\mathrm{d}}v; \end{aligned}$$
(63)

but practical calculation of this integral does not raise any problem since it is given by the following very quickly converging series (Gradshteyn and Ryzhik 1980, formula 2.643.3):

$$\begin{aligned} J(u) = \frac{u^2}{2} + \sum _{k=1}^{+\infty } (-1)^{k+1}\frac{2^{2k-1}-1}{(k+1)(2k)!}\,B_{2k}u^{2(k+1)}\nonumber \\ \end{aligned}$$
(64)

where \(B_i\) is the \(i\)th Bernoulli number.

Defining

$$\begin{aligned} {\bar{x}} \equiv \frac{\pi x}{2}, \end{aligned}$$
(65)

the expressions found are as follows:

$$\begin{aligned}&{{\mathcal {A}}}_{11}(x,\alpha ) \simeq - \frac{2}{\pi } \, \tan ^2\alpha \, \ln \left( \cos {\bar{x}} \right) ; \end{aligned}$$
(66)
$$\begin{aligned}&\begin{array}{lll} {{\mathcal {A}}}_{22}(x,\alpha ) &{} \simeq &{} \displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \cos ^2\alpha } \bigg \{ - \ln (\cos {\bar{x}})\left[ -3\cos ^2(2\alpha ) + 2\cos (2\alpha ) + 5 \right] \\ {} &{} {} &{} \displaystyle + \left[ -\frac{7}{4}\,{\bar{x}}\tan {\bar{x}} + \frac{{\bar{x}}^2}{8\cos ^2{\bar{x}}} +\, \frac{J(2{\bar{x}})}{16} \right] \sin ^2(2\alpha ) \bigg \}; \\ {} &{} {} &{} {} \end{array} \end{aligned}$$
(67)
$$\begin{aligned}&\begin{array}{lll} {{\mathcal {A}}}_{33}(x,\alpha ) &{} \simeq &{} \displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \cos ^2\alpha } \bigg \{ \!-\! \ln (\cos {\bar{x}})\left[ 3\cos ^2(2\alpha ) \!+\! 1 \right] \\ &{}&{}\displaystyle \quad {}+ \left[ \frac{5}{4}\,{\bar{x}}\tan {\bar{x}} +\, \frac{{\bar{x}}^2}{8\cos ^2{\bar{x}}} + \frac{J(2{\bar{x}})}{16} \right] \sin ^2(2\alpha ) \bigg \};\\ {} &{} {} &{} {} \end{array} \end{aligned}$$
(68)
$$\begin{aligned}&{{\mathcal {A}}}_{12}(x,\alpha ) = {{\mathcal {A}}}_{21}(x,\alpha ) \simeq \frac{2}{\pi } \, \sin ^2\alpha \left[ \ln \left( \cos {\bar{x}} \right) + \frac{{\bar{x}}}{2}\tan {\bar{x}}\right] ; \end{aligned}$$
(69)
$$\begin{aligned}&{{\mathcal {A}}}_{13}(x,\alpha ) = {{\mathcal {A}}}_{31}(x,\alpha ) \simeq \frac{\tan \alpha }{\pi } \left\{ \ln \left( \cos {\bar{x}} \right) \left[ \cos (2\alpha ) + 1 \right] + \frac{{\bar{x}}}{2}\tan {\bar{x}} \left[ \cos (2\alpha ) - 1 \right] \right\} ; \end{aligned}$$
(70)
$$\begin{aligned}&{{\mathcal {A}}}_{23}(x,\alpha ) = {{\mathcal {A}}}_{32}(x,\alpha ) \simeq \frac{\tan \alpha }{\pi } \left\{ \ln \left( \cos {\bar{x}} \right) \left[ - 3\cos (2\alpha ) + 1 \right] - \frac{{\bar{x}}}{2}\tan {\bar{x}} \left[ 3\cos (2\alpha ) + 1 \right] \right\} . \end{aligned}$$
(71)

Appendix 3: Expressions of the coefficients \(M_{ij}\) and \(N_{ij}\)

The definitions (59) of the coefficients \(M_{ij}\) and \(N_{ij}\) may be rewritten in the form

$$\begin{aligned} \left\{ \begin{array}{l} M_{ij} \equiv \phi (w'_{j-1},w'_j\,;w_i), \\ \phi (u,v;w) \equiv \displaystyle PV \int _{u}^{v} \sqrt{\frac{1-w'}{w'}} \,\frac{{\mathrm{d}}w'}{w'-w} \\ N_{ij} \equiv \psi (w'_{j-1},w'_j\,;w_i) , \\ \psi (u,v;w) \equiv \displaystyle PV \int _{u}^{v} \sqrt{w'(1-w')} \ \frac{{\mathrm{d}}w'}{w'-w}. \end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$
(72)

These integrals may be reduced to ordinary, easily calculable integrals plus a single one in principal value, by using the change of variable \(w'=\sin ^2\theta \) and then expanding the numerator in powers of \(\sin ^2\theta - w\); one thus gets

$$\begin{aligned} \left\{ \begin{array}{lll} \phi (u,v;w) &{} = &{} \displaystyle 2\left[ \arcsin (\sqrt{u})-\arcsin (\sqrt{v})\right] \\ &{}&{} +\, 2(1-w)\chi (u,v;w) \\ \psi (u,v;w) &{} = &{} \displaystyle (1\!-\!2w)\left[ \arcsin (\sqrt{v})\!-\!\arcsin (\sqrt{u})\right] \\ &{}&{} +\, \sqrt{v(1-v)} - \sqrt{u(1-u)} \\ {} &{} {} &{} \displaystyle +\, 2w(1-w)\chi (u,v;w) \end{array} \right. \nonumber \\ \end{aligned}$$
(73)

where

$$\begin{aligned} \chi (u,v;w) \equiv PV \int _{\arcsin (\sqrt{u})}^{\arcsin (\sqrt{v})} \frac{{\mathrm{d}}\theta }{\sin ^2\theta - w}. \end{aligned}$$
(74)

The problem is thus reduced to calculating the single integral in principal value \(\chi (u,v;w)\), which is easily done by using Gradshteyn and Ryzhik (1980)’s formula (2.562.1); the three cases \(w<\arcsin (\sqrt{u})\), \(\arcsin (\sqrt{u})<w<\arcsin (\sqrt{v})\), \(\arcsin (\sqrt{v})<w\) must be distinguished in the calculation but the results may be expressed in a single formula:

$$\begin{aligned} \chi (u,v;w)&= \frac{\Xi (u;w)-\Xi (v;w)}{\sqrt{w(1-w)}}, \nonumber \\ \Xi (t;w)&\equiv \left\{ \begin{array}{lll} \displaystyle \mathrm{argtanh}\left( \sqrt{\frac{t(1-w)}{w(1-t)}} \right) &{} \quad \text{ if } &{} t<w \\ \displaystyle \mathrm{argcoth}\left( \sqrt{\frac{t(1-w)}{w(1-t)}} \right) &{} \quad \text{ if } &{} t>w. \end{array} \right. \nonumber \\ \end{aligned}$$
(75)

Formulae (72), (73) and (75) provide the desired expressions of the coefficients \(M_{ij}\) and \(N_{ij}\).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leblond, JB., Lazarus, V. & Karma, A. Multiscale cohesive zone model for propagation of segmented crack fronts in mode I+III fracture. Int J Fract 191, 167–189 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-015-0001-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-015-0001-x

Keywords

Navigation