| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7172659 | International Journal of Fatigue | 2011 | 8 Pages |
Abstract
⺠The CR and ACR methods are equivalent near the crack tip. ⺠The ACR method provides significant higher values for the crack closure ratio U than ASTM (2% offset) and Elber's method. ⺠The ACR method shows a small sensitivity to the measurement location behind the crack tip on the crack surface. ⺠A higher sensitivity to the location is demonstrated by the ASTM (2% offset) standard method when compared with the ACR method. ⺠The ASTM (2% offset) method is very sensitive to the measurement location. ⺠Elber's method (0% Offset) provided constant values of U for the complete range of locations evaluated. Elber's method (0% offset) is independent of measurement location and agreed fairly well with FE solution.
Keywords
Related Topics
Physical Sciences and Engineering
Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Authors
M. Lugo, S.R. Daniewicz, J.C. Jr.,