Published: Jan 1993
| ||Format||Pages||Price|| |
|PDF (704K)||30||$25||  ADD TO CART|
|Complete Source PDF (8.8M)||30||$119||  ADD TO CART|
This paper reviews the evolution of the critical plane damage models and traces their origins from the early work such as that of Guest. Physical justification in the form of detailed observations of crack nucleation and early growth are provided for the models. A common feature of all successful models is that they consider both cyclic stresses and strains. Material-dependent failure models are needed to account for the differences in crack nucleation and early growth. Shear strain-based models are appropriate for materials that have substantial Mode II growth. Tensile strain-based models are needed for materials that have predominantly Mode I growth. Problems and inconsistencies in interpreting the damage models for variable amplitude nonproportional loading are discussed. Critical experiments for evaluating and discriminating between proposed damage models are suggested.
fatigue, multiaxial, biaxial, damage models, cyclic deformation, critical planes
Professor, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL
Paper ID: STP24793S