CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

An advancement of a new technique for modeling cracks in the Finite Element

Model is presented. A standard displacement-based approximation is improved
near a crack by incorporating both discontinuous fields and the near tip asymptotic
fields through a partition of unity method. A methodology that constructs the
enriched approximation from the interaction of the crack geometry with mesh is
developed. This technique allows the entire crack to be represented independently
of the mesh, and so remeshing is not necessary to model crack growth.
The first step of any finite element simulation is to discretize the actual geometry
of the structure using a collection of finite elements. Each finite element represents
a discrete portion of the physical structure. The finite elements are joined by shared
nodes. The collection of nodes and finite elements is called the mesh. The number
of elements per unit of length, area, or in a mesh is referred to as the mesh density.
In a stress analysis the displacements of the nodes are the fundamental variables
that Abaqus calculates. Once the nodal displacements are known, the stresses and
strains in each finite element can be determined easily.
The finite element method posses certain limitations in such analyses since
changes in the topology of the crack require remeshing of the domain. This tends
to be a severe restriction and is burdensome for crack growth simulations in
complex geometries. To alleviate the computational burden associated with the
insertion of arbitrary cracks into an finite element model, the extended finite
element method (X-FEM) has provided significant advantages over other
approaches such as boundary element methods , remeshing methods , and element
deletion methods . While the application of the boundary element method can
accurately capture the near-tip singularities, its extension to elastoplastic fracture
problems is quite awkward due to the use of a domain integration of fictitious body
forces to account for the nonlinearity.
An element deletion method is easy to implement, but it suffers from a severe
dependence of the solution on the size and structure of the mesh. An automatic
1

adaptive remeshing scheme can be difficult to apply to geometrically nonlinear

problems involved in contact and friction of a growing crack, because of the large
computational burden. The presence of multiple cracks will make the current stateof-the-art remeshing scheme intractable. In X-FEM, the finite element space is
enriched with a discontinuous (jump) function and the near-tip asymptotic
functions, which are added to the standard finite element approximation through
the framework of partition of unity . Reviews on X-FEM are available in the
literature . Numerous illustrations have demonstrated the key advantage of XFEM, especially the ability to characterize arbitrarily shaped cracks in finite
element methods without remeshing. With X-FEM, it is not necessary to
reconstruct the finite element mesh as the problem evolves, therefore completely
eliminating the need for remeshing.
Given the many attractive features of X-FEM in performing the damage tolerance assessment
and simulating a curvilinear crack growth path in a complicated 3D geometry, several attempts
have been promoted to integrate X-FEM with existing commercial FEM solvers. The 3D XFEM toolkit for Abaqus (XFA3D) has been developed and validated using a suite of benchmark
problems.
The main features of XFA3D include: (1) model preparation and arbitrary insertion of initial
cracks that are independent of the base model via Abaqus/CAE; (2) extraction of stress intensity
factors on static or growing crack fronts in metallic structures via the crack tip opening
displacement (CTOD) and life predictions for constant or variable fatigue load; (3) accurate
extraction of Strain Energy Release Rate (SERR) via the modified Virtual Crack Closure
Technique (mVCCT) for composite applications;
and (4) post-processing of the cracked region using Abaqus/Viewer. The critical components of
XFA3D include: the level set representation and updates for a stationary and growing crack, the
penalty approach for interface interactions in crack closure and friction, the element slicing state
recovery algorithm for elasto-plastic fracture problems, and the extraction of fracture driving
force along the crack front.

1.1.FINITE ELEMENT METHOD

Finite Element Method is one of the numerical methods to obtain an approximate solution to
many of the fracture mechanics problems. Today this method has become so powerful due to
high end computers are available. The basic approach to solve the problem by this method is
discretized in to number of sub domains called elements which are connected with other at points
called nodes. All the variables are approximated piecewise, so that they are represented in each
element by simple polynomials. The coefficient of the polynomial equivalently expressed as
2

nodal values of the variables are determined such that governing equations and boundary
conditions are satisfied in the best possible manner. This approximation method may be
variational method or a weighted residual approach.
The modeling of moving discontinuities with the finite element method is cumbersome due to
the need to update the mesh to match the geometry of the discontinuity. Several new finite
element techniques have been developed to model cracks and crack growth without remeshing.
These include the incorporation of a discontinuous mode on an element level, a moving mesh
technique, and an enrichment technique for finite elements based on a partition of unity which
involves minimal remeshing.
1.2.

TYPES OF METHODS

There two methods to determined fracture parameters:

1. Direct Methods to determine fracture parameter
2. Indirect Method to determine fracture parameter
1.2.1. DIRECT METHODS TO DETERMINE FRACTURE PARAMETER
In this kind of method we assume stress, strain field in a 2D crack problem by using 3 or 6
noded triangular elements, 4 noded iso parametric elements. Now for determination of fracture
parameter KI, KII, near the crack tip we can use the expression of displacement and
stress near the crack tip. Watwood gave some studies results with this method on central
cracked specimen. Chan et al.determined KI value with coarse mesh. Very near crack tip the
solution of FEM become in accurate due to its inability to model singular nature of stresses
accurately.
1.2.2. INDIRECT METHOD TO DETERMINE FRACTURE PARAMETER
There are some methods in which no need to use direct formula of crack tip stress. This
gives improved results than direct methods. Some important methods also reviewed as follows:
1.2.2.1.

J-INTEGRAL METHOD

In this method the path of integration for j-integral is taken along the nodes on the elements
edges. And the strain energy density values at nodes are obtained an extrapolation of the
values at Gauss points within the elements. Chan et al.applied this to analyze a compact test
specimen.

1.2.2.2.

ENERGY RELEASE RATE METHOD

3

Watwood applied this method to analyze a center cracked panel of finite size. And the
obtained results further compared with the results obtained by Isida and error was just 2%. This
method can also be applied for 3D case.
1.2.2.3.

STIFFNESS DERIVATIVE METHOD

In this method we calculate the change in potential energy in finite element analysis that
uses the change in stiffness of the plate for two configuration of the crack.
1.2.2.4.

SINGULAR ELEMENT METHOD

All above were not capable to model the large stress gradient at the crack tip that is
theoretically infinite stress at crack tip. Singular elements are special elements which have the
interpolation function to model the singularity at the crack tip.
1.2.2.5.

BARSOUM ELEMENT METHOD

Barsoum introduced a new method as quarter- Point element (Barsoum Element) technique. In
this method 6 noded triangle or 8 node disoparametric quadrilateral elements are used.
1.2.2.6.

EXTENDED FINITE ELEMENT METHOD

In this modern and most effected method a new element called enriched element is
introduced at the crack tip and outside of the crack tip conventional element is place. Gifford
and Hilton was introduced this method and it gives more accurate results than other
methods. Now almost all FEM based programs like Abaqus and ANSYS etc also
accepted this method and worldwide research and industrial field this method is widely
accepted.
1.3.

ABAQUS SOFTWARE

Abaqus is a suite of powerful engineering simulation programs, based on the finite element
method that can solve problems ranging from relatively simple linear analyses to the most
challenging nonlinear simulations. Abaqus contains an extensive library of elements that can
model virtually any geometry. It has an equally extensive list of material models that can
simulate the behavior of most typical engineering materials including metals, rubber, polymers,
composites, reinforced concrete, crushable and resilient foams, and geotechnical materials such
as soils and rock. Designed as a general-purpose simulation tool, Abaqus can be used to study
more than just structural (stress/displacement) problems. It can simulate problems in such
diverse areas as heat transfer, mass diffusion, thermal management of electrical components
(coupled thermal-electrical analyses), acoustics, soil mechanics (coupled pore fluid-stress
analyses), piezoelectric analysis, and fluid dynamics.
Abaqus offers a wide range of capabilities for simulation of linear and nonlinear applications.
4

Problems with multiple components are modeled by associating the geometry defining each
component with the appropriate material models and specifying component interactions.

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE

FATIGUE ANALYSIS

Fatigue is the term used to describe the failure of a component under a repeatedly applied
stress. The stress required to cause the fatigue failure is much less than that which would be
required in a single application. Fatigue failure is practically insidious because it occurs without
any obvious warning. It results in a brittle appearing fracture with no gross deformation at the
fracture that failure usually occurs at a point of stress concentration such as sharp corner of notch
or at a metallurgical stress concentration like an inclusion. Three basic factors are necessary to
cause fatigue failure. These are 1) a maximum tensile stress of sufficiently high value. 2) a large
variation or fluctuation in the applied stress and 3) a sufficiently large number of cycles of the
applied stress.
Fatigue analysis refers to one of three methodologies: local strain or strain life, commonly
referred to as the crack initiation method, which is concerned only with crack initiation (EN, or
sigma nominal); stress life, commonly referred to as total life (S-N, or nominal stress); and crack
growth or damage tolerance analysis, which is concerned with the number of cycles until
fracture. The method for calculating fatigue life is sometimes called the Five Box Trick,
including material, loading, and geometry inputs, and analysis and results. The three main inputs
for fatigue life analyses are processed using various life estimation tools depending on whether
the analysis is for crack initiation, total life, or crack growth.
2

TYPES OF FATIGUE
a
b
c

High Cycle Fatigue(HCF)

Low Cycle Fatigue(LCF)
Thermal mechanical fatigue(TMF)

The principal distinction between High cycle fatigue and Low cycle fatigue is the region of the
stress strain curve where the repetitive application of load (and resultant deformation or strain)
is taking place.
1

HIGH CYCLE FATIGUE (HCF)

HCF is characterized by low amplitude high frequency elastic strains. An example would be an
airfoil subjected to repeated bending. One source of this bending occurs as a compressor or
turbine blade passes behind a stator vane. When the blade emerges into the gas path it is bent
by high velocity gas pressure. Changes in rotor speed change the frequency of blade loading.
The excitation will at some point match the blade's resonant frequency causing the amplitude
of vibration to increase significantly. To clarify this concept we need to return to the stress
strain curve. When a tuning fork is struck it vibrates at its resonant frequency. As the beams of
the fork bend back and forth at hundreds of cycles per second the amplitude of the bending
results in strains that are confined to the elastic portion of the stress strain curve. As the
vibrations die down and stop the fork returns to its original shape. Only elastic strains have
occurred so no permanent deformation has taken place. The tuning fork can endure tens of
millions of cycles under these conditions but eventually it will fail due to HCF. Empirical
parameters for a lot of materials has been determined like Marin factors and Fatigue Strengths
in HCF Both infinite or finite fatigue life is possible and can be analyzed so that it is easy to
use for design applications. If loads are fluctuating in a pseudo-random way, HCF methods can
yield non-conservative results.
In the high cycle fatigue for finite life, the number of cycles goes from 10 4 to approximately
105 cycles.
2

LOW CYCLE FATIGUE (LCF)

Low cycle fatigue is the mode of material degradation when plastic strains are induced in an
engine component due to the service environment. It is characterized by high amplitude low
frequency plastic strains. If we pull the beams of the tuning fork apart until they are
permanently bent we have imparted one half of an LCF cycle. The act of permanently bending
means that we have exceeded the elastic limit point on the stress strain curve and have crossed
over into the plastic region. Forcing the beams back into the original position will require them
to bent or "yielded" thereby completing one LCF cycle. The tuning fork can endure only a very
few of these cycles before it will fail due to LCF. In a turbine blade these large strains occur in
areas of stress concentration. Most turbine blades have a variety of features like holes, interior
passages, curves and notches. These features raise the local stress level to the point where
plastic strains occur. Turbine blades and vanes usually have a configuration at the base referred
to as a dove tail or fir tree. This feature is used to attach the blade to the turbine disk. As engine
rotational speed increases centrifugal forces result in local plastic strains at the attachment
surfaces resulting in LCF damage.
The low cycle fatigue is related to the number of cycles from 10 2 to approximately 103 or 104.

Stresses are close to the ultimate tensile Stress u . Some macroscopic plastic deformation
appears.
6

Low-cycle fatigue involves large cycles with significant amounts of plastic deformation and
relatively short life. The analytical procedure used to address strain-controlled fatigue is
commonly referred to as the Strain-Life, Crack-Initiation, or Critical Location approach.
3

THERMAL MECHANICAL FATIGUE (TMF)

In the case of Thermal mechanical fatigue (present in turbine blades, vanes and other hot section
components) large temperature changes result in significant thermal expansion and contraction
and therefore significant strain excursions. These strains are reinforced or countered by
mechanical strains associated with centrifugal loads as engine speed changes. The combination
of these events causes material degradation due to TMF.
EFFECT OF TEMPRATURE ON FATIGUE
Based of effect of temperatures fatigue types are three types.
1.Low-Temperature Fatigue
2.High-Temperature Fatigue
3.Termal Fatigue
Low-Temperature Fatigue:
Fatigue tests on metals at temperatures below room temperature show that the fatigue strength
increases with decreasing temperature. Although steels become more notch-sensitive in fatigue at
low temperature, there is no evidence to indicate any sudden change in fatigue properties at
temperatures below the ductile-to-brittle transition temperature .The fact that fatigue strength
exhibits a proportionately greater increase than tensile strength with decreasing temperature has
been interpreted as an indication that fatigue failure at room temperature is associated with
vacancy formation and condensation.
High-Temperature Fatigue:
In general,the fatigue strength of metals decreases with increasing temperature above room
temperature.An exception is mild steel,which shows a maximum in fatigue strength at 200 to
3000C.The existence of a maximum in the tensile strength in this temperature range due to strain
aging.As the temperature is increased well above room temperature,creep will become important
and at high temperatures it will be the principal cause of failure.The transition from fatigue
failure to creep failure to creep failure with increasing temperature will result in a change in the
type of failure from the usual transcrystalline fatigue failure to the intercrystalline creep failure.

Ferrous materials, which ordinarily exhibit a sharp fatigue limit in room-temperature tests,will
no longer have a fatigue limit when tested at temperatures above approximately
4300C.Also,fatigue tests at high temperature will depend on the frequency of stress application.

Thermal Fatigue
The stresses which produce fatigue failure at high temperature do not necessarily need to come
from mechanical sources. Fatigue failure can be produced by fluctuating thermal stresses under
conditions where no stresses are produced by mechanical causes.Thermal stresses result when
the change in dimensions of a member as the result of a temperature change is prevented by
some kind of constraint.For the simple case of bar with fixed end supports,the thermal stress
developed by a temperature change T is
= ET
where =linear thermal coefficient of expansion
E=elastic modulus
If failure occurs by one application of thermal stress,the condition is called thermal
shock.However,if failure occurs after repeated applications of thermal stress,of a lower
magnitude,it is called thermal fatigue .

CHAPTER-3
8

STRESS CYCLES
The basic method of presenting engineering fatigue data is by means of the S-N curve, a plot of
stress S against the number of cycles to failure N. A log scale is almost always used for N. The
value of stress that is plotted can be
3.1.

REVERSED STRESS CYCLE:

Fig: 3.1 Reversed stress cycle (Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon, MECHANICAL METALLURGY SI
Metric Edition page no.377)

The above figure illustrates a completely reversed cycle of stress of sinusoidal form. This is an
idealized situation and it is approached in service by a rotating shaft operating at a constant speed
without overloads. For this type of stress cycle the maximum and minimum stresses are equal.
3.2.

REPEATED STRESS CYCLE:

Fig: 3.2 Repeated stress cycle (Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon, MECHANICAL METALLURGY SI
Metric Edition page no.377)

The above figure illustrates a repeated stress cycle in which the maximum stress
minimum stress

min

max

and

are not equal. In this illustration they are both tension, but a repeated

stress cycle could just as well contain maximum and minimum stress of opposite signs or both in
compression.
A fluctuating stress cycle can be considered to be made up of two components, a mean, or steady,

a
stress m , and an alternating, or variable, stress
.we must also consider the range of
stress

.from the above figure.

The range of stress is the algebraic difference between the maximum and minimum stress in a
r = max min
cycle.
The alternating stress is one-half the range stress
a=

r max min
=
2
2

The mean stress is the algebraic mean of the maximum and minimum stress in the cycle.
m=

max + min
2

The two ratios are used in presenting fatigue data:

Stress ration

R=

min
max

A=

Amplitude ration
3.3.

a ( 1R )
=
m (1+ R)

IRREGULAR OR RANDOM STRESS CYCLE

10

Fig: 3.3Irregular or Random stress cycle (Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon, MECHANICAL
METALLURGY SI Metric Edition page no.377)

The above figure illustrates a completed stress cycle which might be encountered in a part
such as an aircraft wing which is subjected to periodic unpredictable overloads due to gusts.
3.4.
S-N CURVE
An empirical relation is determined between applied stress (peak value of the fluctuating load)
and number of cycles N required to cause the failure. The relation is known as S-N curve also
called the Wohler curve. This is a sigmoidal curve by shape and have been in use for more than
a century are still being used by conventional designers and researcher. S-N curve have certain
limitations it adopts black box approach and it does not explore the mechanisms of failure. It
does not show difference between initiation life and propagation life; only over all fatigue life
is taken into account. After testing specimens at different amplitudes of loading, the S-N curve.
It represents the number of cycles or life to failure against the stress amplitude (sa). Failure can
be defined as fracture or crack initiation. Different stress ratios lead to different S-N curves. We
often define the S-N curve for a loading at R = -1. In the following Figure typical S-N curve is
shown. We observe three different zones on the S-N curve.

11

Fig: 3.4 Typical Fatigue S-N Curves for ferrous and nonferrous metals (Adapted from George E.dieter & David
Bacon, MECHANICAL METALLURGY SI Metric Edition page no.379)

From the above Fig: 2.4.1, the number or cycles of stress which a metal can endure before failure
increases with decreasing stress. Unless otherwise indicated, N is taken as the number of cycles
of stress to cause complete fracture of the specimen. Fatigue tests at low stress are usually
carried out for 107 cycles and sometimes to 5x108 cycles for nonferrous metals. For a few
important engineering materials such as steel and titanium, the S-N curve becomes horizontal at
a certain limiting stress. below this limiting stress, which is called the fatigue limit, or endurance
limit, the material presumably can endure an infinite number of cycles without failure.

CHAPTER-4
FATIGUE LOAD
Pun (2001) demonstrated that the proper specification of loading variation is extremely important
to achieve an accurate fatigue life prediction. The loading can be defined in various manners and
whether it is time-based, frequency-based or in the form of some sort of spectra depends on the
type of fatigue analysis. When working with finite element models the loading can be force,
pressure, temperature, displacement, or a number of other types. The time history used in a
fatigue calculation must be a representation of the time variation in the loading applied in the
Finite Element Analysis (FEA). For simple cases, this implies a force-time history corresponding
12

to a time variation in the point loading used in the FEA. There are a number of different kinds of
loading possible, each one requiring a different type of time history. For example, RAMP and
STEP (Fig. 1) define how and when the loading is applied during a given step. The following
figure shows the difference between the two.

Fig: 4.1 Typical Fatigue loads (Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon, MECHANICAL METALLURGY SI
Metric Edition page no.377)

There are two types of fatigue loads.

4.1.

CONSTANT AMPLITUDE LOAD

Mathematical interpretation of constant amplitude loading with max stress

stress

min

with the stress range

given by.

= max min

K max =f

( Wa )

max

13

max

and minimum

K min =f

Where

4.2.

( Wa )

( Wa )

min

is the geometric factor for crack length a and component width W

VARIABLE AMPLITUDE LOAD

Almost all structures and machines are subjected to variable amplitude loading in real life. Due
to variation in nature of loads from one kind of application to another they do not follow the
Gaussian distribution. Dependent of application statistical method is opted to determine the root
mean square value of K . So if Paris Law is chosen then it becomes:
da
=C ( K rms ) m
dN
4.3.

MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Materials subjected to cyclic loading behave differently than under monotonic loading. While
monotonic material properties are the result of material tests where the load is steadily increased
until a test coupon breaks, cyclic material properties are obtained from material stress where
loading is reversed, then cycled until failure at various load levels. Different types of cyclic
material properties are required depending on the type of fatigue analysis.
Because it can be difficult to gain access to measured cyclic properties, much effort has been
expended finding ways of relating monotonic properties to cyclic properties. The approaches
have all been empirical but do provide a means of estimating cyclic properties that are otherwise
expensive to generate.
The RambergOsgood equation was created to describe the non linear relationship between
stress and strainthat is, the stressstrain curvein materials near their yield points. It
isespecially useful for metals that harden with plastic deformation (see strain hardening),
showing a smooth elastic-plastic transition. In its original form, the equation for strain
(deformation) is,

Where
is strain,
14

 is stress,
E is Young's modulus, and
K and n are constants that depend on the material being considered.
The first term on the right side, /, is equal to the elastic part of the strain. While second term,
(/)n, accounts for the plastic part, the parameters K and n describing the hardening behavior
of the material. Introducing theyield strength of the material, o, and defining a newparameter, ,
related to K as = K(/)n-1, it is convenient to rewrite the term on the extreme right side as
follows:

Replacing in the first expression, the RambergOsgood equation can be written as

In the last form of the RambergOsgood model, the hardening behavior of the materialdepends
on the material constants and n. Due to the power-law relationship between stress and plastic
strain, the RambergOsgood model implies that plastic strain is present even for very low levels
of stress. Nevertheless, for low applied stresses and for the commonly used value of the material
constants and n, the plastic strain remainsnegligible compared to the elastic strain. On the other
hand, for stress levels higher than o, plastic strain becomes progressively larger than elastic
strain.
The value(o/) can be seen as ayield offset, as shown in Fig. 2. This comes from the fact that
= (1+)/, where =o.
Accordingly
Elastic strain at yield=o/
Plastic strain at yield = (o/) yield offset
Commonly used values for n are ~5 or greater, although more precise values are usuallyobtained
by fitting of tensile (or compressive) experimental data. Values for can also befound by means
of fitting to experimental data, although for some materials, it can be fixedin order to have the
yield offset equal to the accepted value of strain of 0.2%, which means:
(O/E) = 0.002

15

Fig: 4.2 Generic representation of the Stress-Strain curve (Ramberg and Osgood) (Adapted from George E.dieter &
David Bacon, MECHANICAL METALLURGY SI Metric Edition page no.377) 1943).

CHAPTER-5
FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH
A study of crack formation in fatigue can be facilitated by interrupting the fatigue test to remove
the deformed surface by electropolishing. There will generally be several slip bands which are
16

more persistent than the rest and which will remain visible when the other slip lines have been
polished away. These persistent slip bands are embryonic fatigue cracks since they open into
wide cracks tend to propagate initially along slip planes, although they later take a direction
normal to the maximum applied tensile stress. Fatigue-crack propagation is generally
transgranular.
An important structural feature which appears to be unique to fatigue deformation is the
formation on the surface of ridges and grooves called slip-band extrusions and slip-band
intrusions.
W.A. Wood made many basic contributions to the understanding of the mechanism of fatigue,
and suggested a mechanism for producing slip-band extrusion and intrusions. Woods concepts
of how continued deformation by the slip might lead to a fatigue crack.

Fig: 5.1 Woods concept of micro deformation leading to formation of fatigue crack. (a) Static deformation; (b)
fatigue deformation leading to surface notch (intrusion); (c) fatigue deformation leading to slip-band extrusion
(Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon, MECHANICAL METALLURGY SI Metric Edition page no.396).

The above figures illustrate schematically the fine structure of a slip band at magnifications with
the electron microscope. In Fig.1a Slip produced by static deformation would produce a contour
at the metal surface. The back and forth fine slip movements of fatigue could build up notches
(Fig. 1b) or ridges (Fig.1c) at the surface. The notch would be a stress raiser with a notch root of
atomic dimensions. Such a situation might well be the start of a fatigue crack. This mechanism
for the initiation of a fatigue crack is an agreement with the facts that fatigue cracks start at
surfaces and that cracks have been found to initiate at slip-band intrusions and extrusions.
Fatigue is the term used to describe the failure of a component under a repeatedly applied stress.
The stress required to cause fatigue failure is much less than that which would be required in a
single application. Fatigue is the single largest cause of engineering failures. There are three
stages for fatigue crack growth.
5.1.

CRACK INITIATION

17

This initiation results from the application of stress in excess of the local yield value to a
material. This results in the generation of dislocations, the subsequent movement of which forms
slip bands/lines where these intersect the surface. Repeated stressing of the material concentrates
deformation into certain of these slip steps, which become broader and deeper until a microcrack is initiated. The irreversibility of the slip mechanism accounts for this process. Thin folds
of material known as extrusions are pushed out of the surface. Where the specimen has a very
severe stress concentration the initiation stage may be effectively by-passed.
5.2.

CRACK GROWTH

The traditional approach for determining the fatigue limit for a structure is to establish the S-N
curves for materials in the structure. Such an approach is generally conservative, and no
relationship between the crack length and the cycle number is available. One alternative
approach is to predict the fatigue life by using a crack/damage evolution law when the structural
response is stabilized after many cycles.
Because the computational cost to simulate the slow progress of damage in a material over many
load cycles is prohibitively expensive for all but the simplest models, numerical fatigue life
studies usually involve modeling the response of the structure subjected to a small fraction of the
actual loading history. This response is then extrapolated over many load cycles using empirical
formulae such as the Coffin-Manson relationship (Fig. 3) to predict the likelihood of crack
initiation and propagation. Since this approach is based on a constant crack/damage growth rate,
it may not realistically predict the evolution of the crack or damage.

Fig: 5.2 Strain-life relation (Coffin-Manson (Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon, MECHANICAL
METALLURGYI Metric Edition)

It has been reported that the low-cycle fatigue behavior can be modeled by CoffinManson
p N =C
relationship:

where,
Nf is the fatigue life
the plastic strain range
18

 the fatigue ductility exponent and

C is the fatigue ductility coefficient.
The plastic strain range is the intercept of the stress-strain hysteresis loop with the strain axis as
shown in Fig.4.

Fig: 5.3 Plastic shakedown in direct cycling analysis(Adapted from ABAQUS Manual)

The direct cyclic analysis capability in Abaqus/Standard provides a computationally effective

modeling technique to obtain the stabilized response of a structure subjected to a cyclic loading
and is ideally suited to perform low-cycle fatigue calculations on a large structure. The direct
cyclic low-cycle fatigue capability is an extension of the direct cyclic capability that includes
damage accumulation and damage extrapolation. The response is obtained by evaluating the
behavior of the structure as discrete points along the loading history, as illustrated in below fig

Fig: 5.4 Elastic stiffness degradation as a function of the cycle number (Adapted from ABAQUS Manual)

The solution at each of these points is used to predict the degradation and evolution of material
properties that will take place during the next increment of load cycles, N. The degraded
material properties are then used to compute the solution at the next point in the load history.
19

This capability can be used to model progressive damage and failure both in the bulk material
and at the material interface. When failure mechanisms both in the bulk material and at the
interfaces are considered simultaneously, the failure occurs first at the
weakest link in the model. The damage initiation and evolution in the bulk material are
characterized by the accumulated inelastic hysteresis strain energy per stabilized cycle, as
illustrated in Fig. 4.
The onset and fatigue delamination growth at the interfaces are characterized by the relative
fracture energy release rate by using the Paris law, as shown in Fig. 5.5

Fig: 5.5Fatigue Crack Growth governed by the Paris Law (Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon,
MECHANICAL METALLURGYI Metric Edition)

For linear elastic materials, Griffiths approach says that a crack extends if the thermodynamic
crack driving force, characterized by the energy release rate G (Fig. 6), becomes equal or larger
than the crack growth resistance, R (Griffith, 1921), whereas the Irwin (1957) approach
postulates that a crack grows when the crack tip stress intensity factor K reaches a critical value
Kc (Fig. 7). The Griffith and Irwin criteria are equivalent for linear elastic materials, since energy
release rate and stress intensity factor are related. Crack tip conditions are defined by a single
parameter, such as stress intensity factor. Under cyclic constant amplitude stress intensity, the
crack growth rate for small plastic zones at the crack tip is defined by:
da
=f ( K , R )
dN
where,
K cycles between Kmax Kmin
20

R = Kmin / Kmax=Smin/Smax
da/dN = crack growth rate per cycle, L(cycle)-1
In field-situations, a history dependent factor is added into the function to account for previous
loading conditions during service-life of the element. The similitude assumption shown for crack
growth rate does not take into account occasional overloads and/or under loads which will turn
the problem into a variable amplitude loading configuration. Since the stress intensity factor
cannot characterize excessive plasticity at crack tip, researchers proposed that crack growth be a
function of J-integral. For fatigue resulting in large-scale yielding, the J value will be employed
and is analogous from monotonic loading. Fatigue crack propagation curve (log da/dNlog K)
may be divided into three stages which are typical for: short crack growth propagation stage
(Region I), long crack propagation (Region II), and fracture stage (Region III) (Fig. 5). Where
the behavior of the linear segment in Region II, also known as the Paris regime, is enforced by
the Paris power law:
da
m
=C( K )
dN
Where C and m are material constants determined experimentally

Fig: 5.6 Schematic sigmoidal behavior of fatigue crack growth rate versus K(Adapted from George E.dieter &
David Bacon, MECHANICAL METALLURGYI Metric Edition)

For a given material, the fatigue crack growth rate depends only on the loading parameters; K
and R for the elastic range of the crack, and are only suitable for a constant cyclic stress
amplitude (Fig. 8). In Region I, a threshold value needs to be overcome in order to form cracks.
This fatigue crack propagates along high shear stress planes (45 degrees), until it is decelerated
21

by a microstructural barrier such as a grain boundary or inclusions. This process increases the
stress intensity factor, K, as slips start to develop in different planes close to the crack tip,
initiating stage II.

In the Paris regime, m is the slope of the line and C is the coefficient found when extending the
line to K = 1 MPa(m)1/2. Stage III is related to unstable crack growth as Kmax approaches
fracture toughness, KIC. At this stage, crack growth is controlled by static modes of failure and is
very sensitive to the microstructure, load ratio, and stress state. In the fracture region, it can be
either brittle or ductile, depending on the mechanical properties of the material, dimensions of
the part, and loading conditions. At high values of K max, linear-elastic fracture mehcahnics and
parameters like J need to be taken into account. For crack growth in elasticplastic materials
under large-scale or general yielding conditions, the common approach is to use Rices J-integral,
which presumes deformation plasticity and treats elasticplastic materials as non-linear elastic.
Characterized on a contour around the crack tip, Jtip, characterizes both the thermodynamic
crack driving force, and the intensity of the crack tip fields in non-linear elastic materials. The Jintegral is independent of the contour used to evaluate it, so Jtip = Jfar where Jfar is the integral
on a contour in the far-field. This path independence is important, since the energy released at the
crack tip (Jtip) cannot be easily measured, whereas the total energy released during crack
extension in a body (Jfar) can be readily measured. In homogeneous elastic materials, Jtip is
identical to the total energy released in the specimen per unit crack extension, whereas this is not
so in elasticplastic materials due to the dissipation in the plastic zone which induces the
plasticity influence term, Cp, defined as the total configurationally force due to plasticity,
projected on the crack growth direction. For deformation plasticity, the plasticity influence term
Cp vanishes in thecontext of deformation plasticity, whereas the crack driving force Jtip vanishes
for rigid plasticity.
An experimental study on C(T) specimens to examine the influence of plastic deformation near
the crack tip was performed on annealed mild steel with a Youngs modulus of 200 GPa. Loading
was simulated by prescribing the load line displacement ll assuming plane strain conditions.
The far-field J-integral values are compared to ABAQUS values calculated using the virtual
crack extension and to experimental values determined from the area below the load vs. load-line
displacement curve (Rice, 1973). Results showed that the configurational body force arises only
due to plastic deformation and is large directly at the crack tip for homogeneous material. From
the calculated plastic zone of 2 mm, the configurational force rapidly decreases to zero at a
distance less than 2 mm. Abaqus showed that a plastic deformation starts at the back face of the
specimen for ll=0.2 mm (a) and as it increases to 0.343 mm (b) and 0.352 mm (c) show that
with increasing loading, both the crack tip plastic zone and the region of remote plasticity
expand. The two regions eventually merge and general yielding ocurrs in the ligament. J-integral
Jtip is the scalar driving force on a crack tip in elasticplastic materials.
After an extensive analysis performed on the behavior of the J-integral for different cases, it was
concluded that the scalar driving force at the crack tip of an elastic-plastic material is defined as
22

Jtip. The crack driving force, Jtip, is equal to the sum of the global driving force Jfar and the
plasticity influence term Cp, therefore Jtip = Jfar+Cp. It was also found that the J-integral is
path-independent in homogenous elastic bodies due to the fact that configurational body forces
disappear, but in elastic-plastic bodies these forces are present and depend on the plastic strain
gradient. This makes the J-integral path dependent in incrementally plastic materials.
Courtin (2005) studied the crack opening displacement extrapolation method and the Jintegral
approach applied to ABAQUS finite element models. The results obtained by these
various means on CT specimens and cracked round bars are in good agreement with those found
in the literature. The J-integral calculation relies as a good technique to deal with since no
knowledge of the crack-tip field is required. In the heart of the body, as one can assume a plane
strain state, the expression on the crack lips ( = ), where u is the angular displacement, is
Poissons ratio, and r is the radial distance from crack-tip is defined by:
KI=

E
2

2
4 (1v ) r

An energetic approaching introduced by Rice (1974) to calculate a two-dimensional line for

determining the J-integral is seen in the equation below:

where U is the strain energy density, t is the stress vector, d is the displacement vector and ds is
the element of arc along the path. The contour begins on the lower crack surface and ends on
the upper crack surface, traveling counterclockwise. For a C(T) specimen governed by a stress
intensity factor K which is function of: applied load P, thickness B, W is the characteristic length
and a is the crack length, the meshed figure from ABAQUS for the upper half of the sample
along with a schematic of the definitions may be seen in Fig. 18. ABAQUS highlights the
possibility of calculating stress intensity distribution by employing an energetic approach which
calculates the J-integral values on contours surrounding the crack tip. After during an
experimental study with C(T) samples and round bars; the J-integral method may be applied
automatically with the ABAQUS code and results suitable to deal with the fatigue growth of
general cracks. For design of parts under fatigue, constant amplitude loading is usually utilized
(Stephens et al. 2001), where the loading depends on the R-ratio value (Fig. 9); for fully reversed
bending R=-1, for pulsating tension R=0. In the first case, the minimum and maximum stresses
are equal in magnitude and opposite in sign. For the latter case, the minimum stress is equal to
zero. From these tests a fatigue-life curve (S-N) and consequently, an estimation of remaining
life may be obtained; and will be influenced by the microstructure, size, surface finish and
cycling frequency. It should be noted that cyclic loading can cause strain hardening/softening of
23

a material. Low strength metals will tend to harden, whereas high strength metals with low
ductility will soften. The application of linear-elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) evaluates the
strength of a component in the presence of a crack under the assumption that materials behave
predominantly elastic during the fatigue process.
Griffith demonstrated that crack extension in brittle materials was governed by the far-field
stress, material properties and the root of crack length. The concept was recognized as the energy
release rate, G, representing the elastic energy per unit crack surface area required to extend a
crack.

Fig: 5.8 Nomenclature for constant amplitude cycling loading.(Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon,
MECHANICAL METALLURGYI Metric Edition)

Irwin later showed that G and stress intensity factor K may be related for plane stress conditions
as:

where in plane strain, E = E/(1-2). Value of K depends on crack shape, displacement mode and
structure configuration with S being the nominal stress assuming no crack. Units for K are
MPa(m)1/2 and ksi(in)1/2. An arbitrary stress at a distance r from the crack tip and in plane
may be represented by Fig. 10.

24

Fig: 5.9 Elastic Stresses near the crack tip(a<<1)(Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon, MECHANICAL
METALLURGYI Metric Edition)

It must be specified that the use of LEFM is restricted to small plastic zones at crack tip. Stress
intensity factors for different loading types inside the same mode may be added together by using
superposition, whereas K values for different modes (mode I, II, III) cannot be added.
When comparing plastic zone sizes using the von Mises maximum shear stress criteria, it may be
seen that a larger plastic zone is present in plane stress conditions as seen in Fig. 11(a). This is
due to the fact that in plane strain, the normal stress component, z, is zero and restricts plastic
flow. Irwin developed a correction for the plastic zone radius, ry, ahead of the tip; he argued that
plasticity at the tip forced the crack to behave longer than its true length due to plasticity and
redistribution of the stress fields.
During cyclic loading, a plastic zone size will be present and the local stress at the crack tip will
be less than that observed in monotonic loading. For a given cycle, monotonic loading is
referenced by the maximum load and the cyclic characteristic is observed when the load reaches
a minimum in a single cycle, as seen in Fig. 11(b). Compressive stresses inside the plastic zone
radius, ry, are compressive and will decrease to tensile at a distance away from 2ry.

Fig: 5.10 Plastic zone size at the tip of a through-thickness crack (Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon,
MECHANICAL METALLURGYI Metric Edition)

25

For plane stress conditions, the plastic zone for R>0 is calculated as:

Where; Sy is the yield stress; for plane strain the plastic zone results in a third of the plane stress
size. It may be seen that stress intensity factor governs crack growth and plasticity zone and the
LEFM methods may be applied because ry is much smaller than for monotonic loading. A
fracture toughness criterion, KIc is defined as the K value that for a given load, crack length, and
geometry will cause fracture at the last cycle of fatigue without an increase in applied load. It is
dependent on material, environment metallurgical conditions, grain orientation and thickness.
Therefore, low impurity metals will provide better KIc behavior. A decrease in temperature will
increase the yield strength and reduce the KIc, wherease an increase in strain rate will inhance
crack sensitivity and also reduce fracture toughness. For it to be considered a true material
property, the minimum KIC is stated as it reaches an asymptotic minimum value, where an
increase in thickness will not affect the K IC, known as plane strain fracture toughness. Low
strength ductile materials will be subjected to plane strain only if they are very thick.
Elastic-plastic fracture mechanics (EPFM) describe the phenomenon of limited plasticity at the
crack-tip by assuming a slightly enlarged crack, from a toa+ry. The characterizing parameter in
EPFM is known as the J-integral and is a line integral related to energy balance to describe a
cracked component. By defining the J-integral as path independent it may me implied that using
contour I or II will yield the same results, allowing the use of a contour remote from the crack
which contain only elastic loads/displacements (Fig.12). The elastic and plastic components of
the integral are added to form the elastic-plastic J-integral;
J = Je+Jp, with the linear elastic condition, Je = G = K2/E for plane stress.

26

Fig: 5.11 Line contour surrounding a crack tip for J-integral formulation (Adapted from George E.dieter & David
Bacon, MECHANICAL METALLURGYI Metric Edition)

A series of parameters have been investigated to relate crack growth under mixed mode loading
conditions. Experimental studies show that cracks with a small plastic zone will be dictated by
the alternating stresses pulling the crack surfaces apart; whereas in high plasticity materials,
crack growth have shown to be dependent also of the stresses parallel to the crack plane. Energy
release rates for planar crack under plane stress for mixed loading:

Tanaka proposed an equivalent stress intensity factor range, Kq, that when combined with
the above equation yields:

The Stage 2 crack growth models are based upon plastic blunting of the crack tip (Laird[9]) or
the coarse slip type of model, (Neumann [10] and Pelloux [11]). These models consider crack tip
opening displacements (CTOD) by continuum mechanics and by dislocation reactions at the
crack tip.
Lairds plastic blunting model [9] is based upon local slip and crack blunting during tension
followed by crack re-sharpening by compressive loads. Using continuum analysis, the results are
of the following form:
da 4 2
=
a
dN E u
Where:

E Youngs modulus
u Ultimate tensile strength

Applied stress
a Crack length

N Number of loading cycles

27

 Fraction of CTOD contributing to crack advance

The breakdown of a 1:1 relationship between CTOD and

da
dN

has been explained by static

fracture modes at high stress intensities [5] and crack closure effects at low stress intensities.
Because analysis of crack growth by progressive deformation is difficult McClintock derived a
solution connecting CTOD for more 1 and reversed plastic zone size rp,rev by analogy with antiplane strain conditions.

2 y K 2l
da
(CTOD)l=4 r p ,rev
=
dN
E
y E

( )

Where:

Yield stress

This approach assumes that under reversal the stress range before yielding is 2y, ignoring the
Bauschinger effect (the difference in y between successive tension and compression cycles).
Schwalbe assumed elastic-plastic behaviour, and crack growth based upon characteristic plastic
deformation near the crack tip equal to the incremental crack growth per cycle, (calculating for
anti-plane strain and taking into account strain hardening and transforming the result to mode 1
crack opening).
Comparison of theoretical and measured values displayed good correlation especially at low
crack growth rates in low and medium strength materials. Higher rates at higher K values were
attributed to corrosive influences, incomplete understanding of the hardening component and
lower localized strength values than in the bulk material.
Neumann further avoided difficulties in the use of continuum mechanics to model ductile crack
propagation by defining changing crack tip geometry according to the coarseness of the slip.
Slip on both sides of the crack is assumed to occur in slip bands instead of along discrete slip
planes. Material parameters C1and C2characterise the inhomogeneity in both slip systems and the

angle between the slip planes the average strains 1 2 on either side of the crack to give:
C
2
( 1C 2 (C 11)(C 21) sin )
2
1 2=( C 1 C 21 ) /

28

And for the symmetrical case

C1 = C2 = C;

1
C
1 2= sin
1+

When such strains (~1) may be produced by the applied stress, ductile crack propagation is
possible. This ductile fracture model relates the problem of certain stress and plastic strain values
leading to crack extension.
Donahue et al, [15] introduced the threshold stress intensity (Kth) below which a crack does not
grow. This principle means that the rate of crack growth is proportional to the CTOD at a given
stress intensity less the CTOD at Kth ,CTODth , and results in the equation:
da
4A
2
2
=
( K K th )
dN y E
This relationship was found to be valid for many materials, with the constant A being used for
a curve fitting procedure.
Dislocation theories have been applied to plastic blunting/coarse slip models.
Bilby and Heald [16] represented plasticity by a single planar distribution of dislocations ahead
of the crack tip, and derived a fourth power dependence of crack growth rate on K for low
stress amplitudes:
da 5
=
dN 3 4

()

K
2
G y

Where Surface energy

G Shear modulus
Yokobori combined earlier kinetic work and presented a dislocation approach involving dynamic
emission of dislocations from the crack tip, accounting for material constants and K.
Accumulated damage models
McClintock drew upon earlier work by Head and others to produce a model based upon
accumulated damage in front of the crack.
Repeated crack nucleation ahead of the crack tip, over ageingor strain softening leading to strain
concentration, or fracture as a result of sub-grain formation (i.e. dislocation substructure) ahead
of the crack may occur as a result of cyclic strain. Fracture is said to occur when the integral
29

p
(over N cycles) of a function of local plastic strain amplitude, a

, and true plastic strain for

p
monotonic fracture, a ,reaches unity:
N

I = 4
0

ap
p

( )
fa

The best choice of m was found to be 2.

Applied over a specified minimum region the growth law is derived:

da
=7.5 yp
dN
f

rp

( )( )

Where: y = Yield strain

= microstructural scale (e.g.,inclusion spacing)
rp = plastic zone size
Energy approaches to stage 2 crack growth
Growth laws have been derived form energy approaches other than plasticity or dislocation
(damage) considerations. Rice [21] assumed separation occurs when the absorbed hysteresis
energy reaches a critical value per increment of newly formed fracture surface, resulting in a
fourth power dependence on K.
Weertman [22] arrived at a similar result:
4

(K )
da
= 2
dN 8 G 2y U
Where:
U= Total hysteretic work per unit area crack surface
Sih [23] introduced the concept of strain energy density e. This leads to a relationship of the
form
da
C e
dN

30

Where; C is an experimentally determined material constant.

The Paris Equation
Paris and Erdogan [24] applied fracture mechanics concepts to fatigue cracks. This most popular
approach correlates crack-growth rate da/dN and stress intensity amplitude (K).
For a crack length 2a the generalized (Paris) equation may be written:
da
=C ( K )m
dN

Where m and C are material-specific constants. Typically m3 for high strength ductile
materials (e.g. steels) and where brittle fracture modes are encountered m varies from 2 to 10.
The Paris equation is without doubt the most commonly used approach for the presentation of
crack growth data. This is because plotting a graph of log crack growth rate (da/dN) against log
stress intensity amplitude (K) usually produces a sigmoidal type response, with a near linear
section (with a gradient m) over much of the K range of interest (see Fig 2.1), and because it is
a simple equation.

Fig: 5.11 Line typical sigmoidal profile of crack growth data when crack growth rate(da/dN) is plotted against
stress intensity amplitude(K) on a log:log basis (Adapted from George E.dieter & David Bacon, MECHANICAL
METALLURGYI Metric Edition)

5.3. ACCELERATED FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH

31

This stage 3 of fatigue cracking process is rapidly accelerating crack growth per cycle. As the
maximum stress intensity per cycle, Kmax ,approaches the fracture toughness of the material K1C,
the crack growth rate increases exponentially until failure of the remaining ligament occurs by
plastic collapse.

CHAPTER 6
MODELING WITH ABAQUS
6.1. Edge Crack Developed by Fatigue Load (2D)
6.1.1. STEPS FOR CREATING THE UNCRACKED DOMAIN(XFEM)

Step(1): Creating Model data type

1. Open ABAQUS/CAE 6.12

Step(2): PARTS
1. Double click on parts. Enter name as Model, Modeling Space is 2D Planar, Type is
Deformable, Base feature is Shell and Approximate Size is 5. Click Continue.
2. Use rectangle tool to draw a square to from (-2,-2) to (2,2). Click Done.

Step(3): MATERIALS
1. Double click on Materials. Enter name as Steel.
32

2. Click on Mechanical, then Elasticity, then Elastic. Enter Youngs modulus as 210 GPa
and Poissons ratio as 0.33.
3. Click on Mechanical, then Damage for Traction Separation Laws, then Maxsps Damage.
Enter value as 500 MPa.
4. From the suboptions click on Damage Evolution. Enter Displacement at Failure as 1.
Click ok. Click ok.

Step(4):SECTION
1. Double click on Sections. Name as Main. Accept default settings by clicking Continue.
2. Select Steel as material and click box by Plane Stress/Strain thickness. Enter 1 as
thickness. Click ok.

Step(5):SECTION ASSIGNMENT
1. Expand Parts then expand Model.
2. Double click on Section Assignments. Select the domain. Click Done. Accept default
settings .Click Ok.

Step(6):MESH
1. Expand Model. Double click on Mesh.
2. From the top menu select Seed, then Edge By Number. Select the Domain. Click Done.
Enter 6 as Number of elements along the edge.
3. Repeat the above step for all sides of the rectangle. Hit Enter. Click Done.
4. From the top menu, select Mesh, then Controls, select Quad, Structured, Click ok.
5. From the top menu, select Mesh, then Part. Click Yes.

Step(7):ASSEMBLY
1. Expand Assembly. Double click on Instances. Select Plate. Accept default settings by
clicking Ok

STEPS FOR CREATING THE CRACKED DOMAIN

Step(8):PARTS
1. Double click on Parts. Enter Name as Crack, Modeling Space is 2D Planar, Type is
Deformable, Base Feature is Wire and Approximate Size is 5. Click Continue.
2. Draw a line from (-2,0) to (-1,0). Click Done.
33

Step(9):ASSEMBLY
1. Expand Assembly. Double click on Instances. Select Model. Accept default settings by
Clicking Ok.

Step(10):INTERACTIONS
1. Double click on Interactions. Click Cancel.
2. From top menu, click Special, then Crack, then Create, Name as Edge Crack, Type is
XFEM. Click Continue.
3. Select the uncracked domain as the Crack Domain. On the menu which appears, specify
the Crack Location by clicking on the line signifying the crack. Click Ok.
4. Double click on Interactions. Enter Name as Growth. Click Continue. XFEM Crack
should have Edge Crack. Click Ok.

STEPS FOR CREATING THE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS AND LOAD

Step(11):STEPS
1. Double Click on Steps. Enter Name as Loading. Accept default setting and click
Continue. Accept default settings and click Ok.

Step(12):AMPLITUDE
1. Right Click on the Amplitude. Click create and then select Periodic and click Continue.
2. Time span is Step time. Note Circular frequency is 31.42, Starting time is 0.05 and Initial
amplitude is 0.55. Enter 0 and 0.45 as A and B values. Click Ok.

Step(13):LOAD
1. Double click on Loads. Enter Name as Top Pressure, Category is Mechanical, Type is
Pressure. Click Continue.
2. Select the top edge of the domain. Click Done. Enter -100 as Magnitude, other settings
are default. Click Ok.
3. Repeat the above step for the bottom edge of the domain, entering the names as Bottom
Pressure.

Step(14):BCs
1. Select Load Module. On the top menu Click on BC and click on create. Enter name as
Boundary Conditions. Step is Initial, Category is Mechanical, Type for Selected Step is
Displacement/Rotation.
2. Click on the bottom right corner of the domain. Click Done. Set U1, U2, UR3 to zero.
Click Ok.
34

3. Repeat the above steps for the top right corner of the domain. Enter Name as Roller. Set
U1, UR3 to zero.

Step(15): FIELD OUTPUT REQUESTS

1. Expand Field Output Requests, double click on F-Output-1. Expand the Failure/Fracture
options and check the box next to PHILSM, Level set value phi.
2. Click Ok. This will allow you to view the level set function defining the crack.

STEPS FOR SOLVING THE SYSTEM OF EQUATIONS

Step(16):JOBS
1. Double click on Jobs. Enter name as Edge Crack. Click Continue. Accept default settings
by clicking Ok.
2. Expand Jobs. Right click on Edge Crack and then click Submit.
3. Right click on Edge crack , click Results to view the results.

6.1.2. STEPS FOR CREATING THE UNCRACKED DOMAIN(CONTOUR

INTEGRAL):
Step(1): Creating Model data type
1. Open ABAQUS/CAE 6.12

Step(2): PARTS
1. Double click on parts. Enter name as Model, Modeling Space is 2D Planar, Type is
Deformable, Base feature is Shell and Approximate Size is 5. Click Continue.
2. Use rectangle tool to draw a square to from (-2,-2) to (2,2). Click Done.
3. Use line tool to draw a line from center of the edge to the center of the face.
4. Use contour tool to draw contours from the edge of the crack created.

Step(3): MATERIALS
1. Double click on Materials. Enter name as Steel.
2. Click on Mechanical, then Elasticity, then Elastic. Enter Youngs modulus as 210 GPa
and Poissons ratio as 0.33.
3. Click on Mechanical, then Damage for Traction Separation Laws, then Maxsps Damage.
Enter value as 500 MPa.
4. From the suboptions click on Damage Evolution. Enter Displacement at Failure as 1.
Click ok. Click ok.
35

Step(4):SECTION
1. Double click on Sections. Name as Main. Accept default settings by clicking Continue.
2. Select Steel as material and click box by Plane Stress/Strain thickness. Enter 1 as
thickness. Click ok.

Step(5):SECTION ASSIGNMENT
1. Expand Parts then expand Model.
2. Double click on Section Assignments. Select the domain. Click Done. Accept default
settings .Click Ok.

Step(6):ASSEMBLY
1. Expand Assembly. Double click on Instances. Select Plate. Select the Part and click on
Independent (mesh on instance) and Click Ok

Step(7):STEPS
1. Double Click on Steps. Enter Name as Loading and Select Static, General.
2. In the Incrementation , select Fixed, and Enter increment size as 0.2.
3. Accept default setting and click Continue. Accept default settings and click Ok.

Step(8):INTERACTIONS
1. Double click on Interactions and click Cancel.
2. From top menu, Click Special and then Assign Seam and then select the crack domain.
3. From top menu, click Special, then Crack, then Create, Name as Edge Crack, Type is
Contour Integral. Click Continue. Then Select the inner contour region as the crack front.
Then select the crack tip region.
4. Then enter q vectors and select the two points on the contour region and hit enter.
5. Then from the appeared dialog box, click on Singularity and enter Middle node parameter
value as 0.25.
6. In the Degenerate Element Control on Crack Tip/Line, click on Collapsed element side,
single node. Click Ok

Step(9): FIELD OUTPUT REQUESTS

1. Expand Field Output Requests, double click on F-Output-1. Select the Domain as Crack.
Enter Number of Contours as 4. Click Ok.

Step(10):AMPLITUDE
1. Right Click on the Amplitude. Click Create and then select Periodic and click Continue.
36

2. Time span is Step time. Note Circular frequency is 31.42, Starting time is 0.05 and Initial
amplitude is 0.55. Enter 0 and 0.45 as A and B values. Click Ok.

Step(11):LOAD
1. Double click on Loads. Enter Name as Top Pressure, Category is Mechanical, Type is
Pressure. Click Continue.
2. Select the top edge of the domain. Click Done. Enter -100 as Magnitude and select Amp1 as the Amplitude other settings are default. Click Ok.
3. Repeat the above step for the bottom edge of the domain, entering the names as Bottom
Pressure.

Step(12):BCs
1. Select Load Module. On the top menu Click on BC and click on create. Enter name as
Boundary Conditions. Step is Initial, Category is Mechanical, Type for Selected Step is
Displacement/Rotation.
2. Click on the middle of the right edge of the domain. Click Done. Set U1, U2, UR3 to
zero. Click Ok.

Step(13):MESH
1. Select Mesh Module. From the top menu, select Controls and then select the inner
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

contour region, Click Done.

In the Mesh Controls, select Tri and then Click Ok.
Again from the top menu, select Controls and then select the outer contour and the plate,
Click Done.
In the Mesh Controls, select Quad, Free and Medial Axis and Click Ok.
Select Element Type and select the inner contour region and Click Done.
In the Element Type, Select Standard (in Element Library), Quadratic (in Geometric
Order), Plane Stress (in Family). Click Ok. Click Ok.
Repeat the above procedure by selecting the Outer Contour and the Plate.
From the top menu, Click on Mesh and Click on the Instance. Select the domain and click
Yes.

STEPS FOR SOLVING THE SYSTEM OF EQUATIONS

Step(14):JOBS
1. Double click on Jobs. Enter name as Edge Crack. Click Continue. Accept default settings
by clicking Ok.
2. Expand Jobs. Right click on Edge Crack and then click Submit.
3. Right click on Edge crack , click Results to view the results.
37

6.2 Edge Crack Developed by Fatigue Load (3D)

6.2.1 STEPS FOR CREATING THE UNCRACKED DOMAIN(XFEM):
Step(1): Creating Model data type
1.Open ABAQUS/CAE 6.12

Step(2): PARTS
1. Double click on Parts. Enter name as Solid, Modeling Space is 3D, Type is Deformable,
Base Feature is Solid and Approximate Size is 5. Click Continue.
2. Use the rectangle tool to draw a square from (-2,-2) to (2,2). Click Done. Enter 4 for the
depth. Click Ok.

Step(3): MATERIALS
1. Double click on Materials. Enter name as Steel.
2. Click on Mechanical, then Elasticity, then Elastic. Enter Youngs modulus as 210
GPa and Poissons ratio as 0.33.
3. 3.Click on Mechanical, then Damage for Traction Separation Laws, then Maxsps
Damage. Enter value as 500 MPa.
4. 4.From the suboptions click on Damage Evolution. Enter Displacement at Failure
as 1. Click ok. Click ok.

Step(4):SECTION
1. Double click on Sections. Name as Main. Accept default settings by clicking Continue.
2. Select Steel as material and click box by Plane Stress/Strain thickness. Enter 1 as
thickness. Click ok.

Step(5):SECTION ASSIGNMENT
1. Expand Parts then expand Model.
2. Double click on Section Assignments. Select the domain. Click Done. Accept default
settings .Click Ok.

Step(6):MESH
1. Expand Solid. Double click on Mesh. From the top menu select Seed, then Edge By
Number. Select the Domain. Click Done. Enter 6 as Number of elements along the edges.
Hit Enter. Click Done.
2. From the top menu select Mesh, then Controls. Select Hex, Structured. Click Ok. From
the top menu select Mesh, then Part. Click Yes.
38

Step(7):ASSEMBLY
1. Expand Assembly. Double click on Instances. Select Plate. Accept default settings by
clicking Ok

STEPS FOR CREATING THE CRACKED DOMAIN

Step(8):PARTS
1. Double click on Parts. Enter Name as Crack, Modeling Space is 3D Planar, Type is
Deformable, Base Feature is Shell and Approximate Size is 5. Click Continue.
2. Draw a line from (-2,0) to (-1,0). Click Done

Step(9):ASSEMBLY
1. Expand Assembly. Double click on Instances. Select Model. Accept default settings by
Clicking Ok.

Step(10):INTERACTIONS
1. Double click on Interactions. Click Cancel.
2. From top menu, click Special, then Crack, then Create, Name as Edge Crack, Type is
XFEM. Click Continue.
3. Select the uncracked domain as the Crack Domain. On the menu which appears, specify
the Crack Location by clicking on the line signifying the crack. Click Ok.
4. Double click on Interactions. Enter Name as Growth. Click Continue. XFEM Crack
should have Edge Crack. Click Ok.

STEPS FOR CREATING THE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS AND LOAD

Step(11):STEPS
1. Double Click on Steps. Enter Name as Loading. Accept default setting and click
Continue. Accept default settings and click Ok.

Step(12):AMPLITUDE
1. Right Click on the Amplitude. Click create and then select Periodic and click Continue.
2. Time span is Step time. Note Circular frequency is 31.42, Starting time is 0.05 and Initial
amplitude is 0.55. Enter 0 and 0.45 as A and B values. Click Ok.

Step(13):LOAD

39

1. Double click on Loads. Enter Name as Top Pressure, Category is Mechanical, Type is
Pressure. Click Continue.
2. Select the top edge of the domain. Click Done. Enter -100 as Magnitude, other settings
are default. Click Ok.
3. Repeat the above step for the bottom edge of the domain, entering the names as Bottom
Pressure.

Step(14):BCs
1. Select Load Module. On the top menu Click on BC and click on create. Enter name as
Boundary Conditions. Step is Initial, Category is Mechanical, Type for Selected Step is
Displacement/Rotation.
2. Click on the bottom right corner of the domain. Click Done. Set U1, U2, U3,UR1,UR2, UR3
to zero. Click Ok.
3. Repeat the above steps for the top right corner of the domain. Enter Name as Roller. Set
U1, UR3 to zero.

Step(15): FIELD OUTPUT REQUESTS

1. Expand Field Output Requests, double click on F-Output-1. Expand the Failure/Fracture
options and check the box next to PHILSM, Level set value phi.
2. Click Ok. This will allow you to view the level set function defining the crack.

STEPS FOR SOLVING THE SYSTEM OF EQUATIONS

Step(16):JOBS
1. Double click on Jobs. Enter name as Edge Crack. Click Continue. Accept default settings
by clicking Ok.
2. Expand Jobs. Right click on Edge Crack and then click Submit.
3. Right click on Edge crack , click Results to view the results.

6.2.2. STEPS FOR CREATING 3D PART IN ABAQUS

Step(1): Creating Model data type
1. Open ABAQUS/CAE 6.12

Step(2): PARTS
1. Double click on parts. Enter name as Model, Modeling Space is 3D, Type is Deformable,
Base feature is Solid, Type is Sweep and Approximate Size is 0.04. Click Continue.
2. Use circular tool to draw a circle with the 0.004. Click Done.
40

3. Enter Maximum scale for the section sketch as 0.04.

4. Use line tool to draw lines from (0.014,0) to (0.014,0.012), (0.014,0.012) to (0.014,0.02)
and (0.014,0.02) to (0.009,0.02).
5. Select the Dimension entity and select the line drawn from (0.014,0) to (0.014,0.012) and
drag it up to (0.015,0.004). Hit Enter.
6. Select the Dimension entity and select the line drawn from (0.014,0.012) to (0.014,0.02)
and drag it up to (0.016,0.017). Hit Enter.
7. Select the Dimension entity and select the line drawn from (0.014,0.012) to (0.014,0.02)
and drag up to (0.01,0.016). Hit Enter.
8. Use line tool to draw lines from (0.009,0.02) to (0.009,0) and (0.009,0) to (0.011,0).
9. Select the Dimension entity and select the line drawn from(0.009,0) to (0.011,0) and
drag up to (0.01,-0.001). Hit Enter.
10. From the top menu. Select Edit and Transform and then Mirror. Click on Copy.
11. Select all the lines drawn and click Done. Click Done
12. Select Create Arc and draw an arc from the points (0.014,-0.012) to (0.014,0.012) . Click
Done.
13. Delete the extra lines drawn..
14. From the top menu, Click Edit then Transform and Translate. Click Move. Select the Part.
Enter (0.009,0) and (0.004,0). Hit Enter. Click Done. Part was generated.

41

CHAPTER 7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
1Edge Crack DEVELOPED BY FATIGUE LOADs in contour methode(2D)

1)S,Max

2)U,Magnitude

1Edge Crack DEVELOPED BY FATIGUE LOADs in XFEM(2D)

42

3) S,Mises

Edge Crack DEVELOPED BY FATIGUE LOADs (3D)

3d-6mesh-100 load-A36 steel

4)Without fatigue load

43

5)S,Max

6)S,Mises

3d-6mesh-120 load-A36 steel

44

7)E-Max
8)S,Mises

3d-6mesh-100 load-AISI steel

9) E,Max

10)S,Mises

3d-6mesh-120 load-AISI steel

45

11)E,Max

12)S,Misesss

3d-6mesh-100 load- steel

13)E,Max

14)S,Mises

3d-6mesh-120 load- steel

46

15)S,Max

16)S,Mises

CREATING 3D PART IN ABAQUS

DISCUSSIONS
Fig1: S,Max
47

When we apply Mises condition, the distribution is uniform.

Fig 2: for,U magnitude
When we apply Mises condition, by applying some load, stress is high at red color region, Value
is 7.702e-05.
Fig3: for S, Mises
When we apply Mises condition, by applying some load, stress is high at red color region, Value
is 2.576e-02
Fig4: With out load
Trough out the material it shows the same color, so no Van Mises stress distribution is there in
the material, material is uniform in null load condition.
Fig5: S, Max
When we apply Mises condition, by applying some load, stress is high at green color region
,value is 8.893e+00.
Fig6: S, Mises
When we apply Mises condition, by applying some load, stress is high at red color region ,value
is 1.18e+32.
Fig7: E, Max
When we apply some load ,stress is maximum at light sky blue, value is 8.564e-05.
Fid8: S, Mises
When we apply some load, stress is maximum at light green area,value is 8.532e+00.
Fig9: E,Max
When we apply Mises condition,by applying some load,stress is high at very very light blue
region,value is 8.545e-05.
Fig10: S,Mises
When we apply some load, stress is maximum at light sky blue color region,value is 8.555e+00.
Fig11: E,Max
When we apply some load ,stress is maximum at gray color region,value is 6.986e-04.
Fig12: S,Mises
When we apply some load,stress is maximum at yellow color it is inside ,value is 9.376e+01.
Fig13: E,Max
48

When we apply some load,stress is maximum at light sky blue color,value is 9.991e-05.
Fig14: S,Mises
When we apply some load ,stress is maximum at sky blue color,value is8.646+00.
Fig15: S,Max
When we apply Mises condition,by applying some load,stress is high at green color region,value
is 9.282e+00.
Fig16: S,Mises
When we apply Mises condition,by applying some load,stress is high at orange color,value is
9.774e+01.

CONCLUSION & REMARKS

CONCLUSION:
Three examples for the simulation of fatigue failure with different loads are demonstrated in 3D
analysis. Two examples for the simulation of fatigue failure in different methods like XFEM and
CONTOUR INTEGRAL are demonstrated in 2D. Each module of the simulation can
be changed according to the material type and the conditions to meet the
object evaluation.
The fast-growing application of materials in industries has broughtnew challenges with regards
to the simulation of fatigue behavior. The advanced features of Abacus, including a large
material library and extensive nonlinear analysis capability coupling, have made it a powerful
design tool for industries in this era.

Remarks:
It has been demonstrated in this thesis that a characteristic fatigue model can be
constructed withconsiderable economy of effort, covering the full range of fatigue strains
of practical interest.
For the specific caseof material, it has been shown that the fundamental equations of this
model are consistent with the material behavior. A statistical evaluation of the
correspondence between fatigue model and test results has been presented which
concentrates on the longer-term data, as appropriate to engineering applications.
It has been demonstrated that fatigue recovery is readily incorporated into the proposed
fatigue model, and that relaxation calculations based on the model are then in satisfactory
agreement with relaxation test data for several materials.
49

REFERENCES
[1] Watwood Jr., V.B. The finite element method for prediction of crack behavior, Nuclear
Engineering and design, 11,pp.323-332, (1969).
[2] Chan, S.K., Tuba, I.S. and Wilson, W.K., On the finite element method in linear fracture
mechanics, 2, pp. 1-17, (1970).
[3] Isida , M. On the tension of a strip with a central elliptical hole, Transactions of Japanese
society of mechanical engineering, 21, pp. 507-518, (1955)
[4]

Barsoum,

R.S.

On

the

use

of

isoparametric

elements

in

linear

fracture

mechanics,International journal for numeric methods in engineering, 10, pp. 25-38.(1976)

[5] Gifford, Jr. L.N. and Hilton, P.D. Stress intensity factors by enriched finite elements
Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 10, pp.507-496,(1978).
[6] Laird,C., Mechanisms and Theories of Fatigue, in Fatigue and Microstructure,
(1978),ASM, pp149-203.
[7] Neumann, P., Coarse Slip Model of Fatigue, ActaMetallurgica, 17, (1969), pp1219-1925.
[8] Pelloux, R.M.N, Mechanisms of Formation of Ductile Straition, ASM Trans.Q., 62 (1969),
pp281-285.
[9] McClintock, F.A., On the Plasticity of the Growth of Fatigue Cracks, in Fracture of
solids,ed.sDrucker D.C. and Gilman J.J., (1963), Interscience, New-York, pp65-102.
[10] Schwalbe, K.H., Approximate Calculation of Fatigue Crack Growth, I.J.Fract., 9, (1973),
pp381-395.
[11] Neumann, P., New Experiments Concerning the Slip Process at Fatigue Cracks I, Acta
Met., 22, (1974), pp1155-1165.
[12] Donahue, R.J. et al Crack Opening Displacement and Rate of Fatigue Growth,
I.J.Fract.Mech.,8, (1972), pp209-219.

50

[13] Bilby, B.A. and Heald, P.T., Crack Growth in Notch Fatigue, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London),
A1482, (1968), pp429-439.
[14] Yokobori, T., Non-linear Interaction Between Main Crack and Nearby Slip Band,
Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 7, (1975), pp377-388.
[15] Head, A.K., The Growth of Fatigue Cracks, Phil. Mag., 44, (1953), pp925-953.
[16] Rice, J.R., Mechanics of Crack Tip Deformation and Extension by Fatigue, in Fatigue
Crack Propagation , STP 415, (1967), ASTM, pp247-309.
[17] Weertman, J., Fatigue Crack Propagation Theories, in Fatigue and Microstructure, (1979),
ASM, pp279-306.
[18] Sih, G.C., Mixed Mode Fatigue Crack Growth Predictions, Engineering Fracture
Mechanics, 14, (1980), pp439-451.
[19] Paris, P. and Erdogan, F., A Critical Analysis of Crack Propagation Laws, J.Basic Eng.
Trans ASME, 85, (1963), pp528-534.
[20]George E.dieter & David Bacon, MECHANICAL METALLURGY SI Metric Edition.

51