Proceedings of IMECE2006

2006 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition

November 5-10, 2006, Chicago, Illinois, USA

IMECE2006-15539

FRACTURE ANALYSIS OF CRACKS IN ANISOTROPIC MATERIALS USING 3DFAS

AND ANSYS
U. OZKAN
Mechanical Eng. and Mech. Dept.
Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA 18015
umo2@lehigh.edu

A. LOGHIN
GE GRC,
One Research Circle,
Niskayuna, NY 12309
loghin@crd.ge.com

A. C. KAYA
GE GRC
One Research Circle, Niskayuna, NY 12309
kaya@crd.ge.com

A. O. AYHAN
GE GRC,
One Research Circle,
Niskayuna, NY 12309
ayhan@crd.ge.com

ABSTRACT
The analysis of two and three dimensional fracture
mechanics problems in anisotropic materials using ANSYS
finite element software and 3DFAS (Three Dimensional
Fracture Analysis System) is examined in this study. The
methodology uses analytically derived generalized plane strain
crack tip fields in anisotropic materials and is implemented into
an ANSYS Macro using ANSYS Parametric Design Language.
It is shown that quarter-point finite element approach is still a
very effective technique for general three dimensional crack
problems in homogeneous anisotropic materials. The
expressions of the crack tip asymptotic displacement field are
summarized and numerical examples of two and three
dimensional crack problems in orthotropic, directionally
solidified, and single crystal materials are presented. The stress
intensity factors are compared with two-dimensional analytical
and numerical solutions available in the literature and with
numerical solutions obtained from FRAC3D [1, 2], a three
dimensional fracture analysis program using enriched finite
elements. Very good agreement is obtained between the
different numerical techniques or with the analytical solutions.
INTRODUCTION
Anisotropic materials are extensively used in many
practical engineering applications. Single crystal and
directionally solidified materials used in gas turbines blades,
single crystal silicon wafers for electronic packages and
composite materials are the most common applications in
industry. Emphasizing that simplified calculations resulting

H. F. NIED
Mechanical Eng. and Mech. Dept.
Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA
18015
hfn2@lehigh.edu

from assumptions of isotropy are no longer sufficient to solve

engineering problems in our sophisticated technology, in 1953,
Lekhnitskii [3] derived the equations for anisotropic elasticity.
For fracture problems, Sih et. al. [4] extended the isotropic
local crack tip stress field for general plane problems to the
rectilinear anisotropic case and showed that the stress
singularity is of the order of r-1/2. Embley [5], Sih and Chen [6]
and Hoenig [7] extended the analysis of crack tip stress fields
to the case of generalized plane deformation for a
homogeneous anisotropic body.
Analytical or handbook solutions for threedimensional fracture problems are very limited in the literature
due to the complexity of the three dimensional nature of the
problems. Because of this fact, the finite element method has
become the most practical approach for solving threedimensional fracture problems. In the finite element method, a
common approach to calculate stress intensity factors is to
incorporate local displacements or stresses along the crack
front with known analytical asymptotic plane strain solutions.
The asymptotic analytical solution is valid at all points along
the crack front, except at the singular point where the crack
front intersects the free surface. Similar to cracks in isotropic
media, cracks in anisotropic materials also exhibit r-1/2
singularity. If this severe stress singularity is not taken into
account, accurate results cannot be obtained from finite element
solutions. In practice, one way to simulate this singularity is to
incorporate the so-called quarter-point singular wedge elements
along the crack front.

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

In this study, a methodology for performing

anisotropic fracture analysis using ANSYS and 3DFAS - GE
proprietary code for fracture mechanics analysis [8] is
presented. The methodology makes use of crack tip
displacement fields in anisotropic materials and is implemented
into an ANSYS Macro. The procedure is the same as that of
[9], except that a general analytical asymptotic solution is used
to solve the fully anisotropic problem. The anisotropic crack tip
fields and the implementation details of the procedure are
presented in the next sections. Numerical examples are also
presented to demonstrate the methodology and the associated
macro. In three dimensional crack problems, selected results
are compared with results from FRAC3D, which is a finite
element software developed at Lehigh University to solve three
dimensional fracture problems in isotropic and anisotropic
media [1, 2].
CRACK TIP FIELDS IN AN ANISOTROPIC MATERIAL
A planar three-dimensional crack in a homogeneous
material is shown in Fig. 1. Material can be orthotropic or
anisotropic. As an example, a planar crack which is not aligned
with principal orthotropy axis in an orthotropic material is
chosen. Since the crack front is not aligned with principal
orthotropy axis, the material properties with respect to local
crack tip coordinate system are considered as anisotropic.

The generalized plane strain condition ( z = 0 )

reduces the 21 independent constants to 15 constants by
relation [5-7],

M ij = sij

10, 11]

l2 ( )l4 ( ) [l3 ( )]2 = 0

P (r, , z=0)

l2 ( ) = M 55 2 2 M 45 + M 44
l3 ( ) = M 15 3 ( M 14 + M 16 ) 2 + ( M 25 + M 46 ) M 24
2

The displacement field of this type of crack is given in

matrix format by [10, 11],
2

( iAFL1 ) k.

z
Figure 1: An arbitrarily oriented planar crack in an orthotropic
material.

and

(6)

(7)

In Equation (7), u and v represent the in-plane displacements

and w gives the out-of-plane displacement of any point P(r, ,
z=0) in the perpendicular plane to the crack front, shown in
Fig.1.
A1 = M 11 2 + M 12 M 16 + ( M 15 M 14 )

Strain-stress relation (Hookes law) for a generally

anisotropic material can be written as,

where the components of

u = [ u , v, w] .

i = sij j

(5)

l4 ( ) = M 11 2M 16 + (2 M 12 + M 66 ) 2M 26 + M 22 .
4

The matrices A, L, F and the vectors u and k are defined

below:

E3

(4)

where

u=

E1

(3)

On the basis of Airy stress functions, Lekhnitskii found that

satisfy the sixth-order characteristic polynomial [3, 5, 6,

y
E2

si 3 s j 3
s33

A2 = M 21 + M 22 M 26 + ( M 25 M 24 )

(8a)

A3 = M 41 + M 42 M 46 + ( M 45 M 44 )

(1)

for = 1, 2 , and

A13 = 3 ( M 11 32 + M 12 M 16 3 ) + M 15 3 M 14

are given by

x , y , z , yz , zx , xy and x , y , z , yz , zx , xy

A23 = 3 ( M 21 3 + M 22 3 M 26 ) + M 25 M 24 3

(2)

(8b)

A33 = 3 ( M 41 3 + M 42 3 M 46 ) + M 45 M 44 3

respectively, and sij are the components of the compliance

1
L = 1
1

matrix.

2
1

3 3
3
1

(9)

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

where

1 =

l3 ( 1 )
l ( )
l ( )
, 2 = 3 2 , 3 = 3 3
l2 ( 1 )
l2 ( 2 )
l4 ( 3 )

11 2

F= 0
0

12
2

0
31 2

(10)

(11)

where is given by

= r ( cos + sin ) , = 1, 2,3

(12)

In Equation (12), r and are local coordinates of an arbitrary

point in the vicinity of the crack front and are measured relative
to the crack plane as shown in Fig. 1. are three distinct
complex numbers with positive imaginary parts. These
complex numbers are obtained by solving the characteristic
polynomial given in Equation (4). The k is the stress intensity
factor vector defined by [10,11],
k = [ K II , K I , K III ] .
T

in Fig. 2) creates the singularity. It is well known that this

procedure will introduce r-1/2 singular behavior to the elements
stress and strain field [12-14]. However, angular dependency,
i.e., - dependency of the analytical near-tip displacement and
strain field cannot be simulated correctly by using singular
wedge elements only. Therefore, mesh refinement in the
angular direction may be needed in order to get accurate cracktip fields.
The KCALC command in ANSYS can be used for
fracture analysis of a crack in homogeneous isotropic medium.
Details of the methodology and procedures for KCALC
command are explained in [15]. Also, in [9], the methodology
of calculating stress intensity factors in ANSYS is extended for
the analysis of cracks aligned with principal material axis in
orthotropic media. Here, the methodology is further extended
to analysis of crack in anisotropic materials.
As mentioned before, the methodology incorporates
upper and lower crack face displacement values at nodes of the
wedge elements with known analytical displacement solution at
the crack faces, i.e., = 1800 . When evaluated at the upper
crack face, i.e., = +1800 , the anisotropic crack tip
displacements given in matrix form in Equation (6) reduce to
the following relations,

(13)

The above equations provide the full field

displacements near the crack tip. Since explicit expressions of
displacements are long and complex, they are not written in
explicit format, and left in matrix form in Equation (6). As
explained in the next section, for performing anisotropic
fracture analysis using ANSYS, only the near tip displacements
evaluated at the crack faces, i.e., = 1800 , are needed.
It must be noted that special care must be given in
calculation of the root of the characteristic Equation (4) when
the material properties are orthotropic with respect to the crack
front coordinate system. In case of orthotropic material, Mode
III is decoupled from the Mode I and Mode II. The decoupling
can be observed from the Matrix L in Equation (9) with zero 1,
2 and 3 defined in Equation (10).
ANISOTROPIC FRACTURE ANALYSIS USING ANSYS
The methodology directly uses the crack face
displacement values from the finite element analysis. In order
to obtain correct crack face displacement values, analytically
known crack tip singularity has to be embedded into the stress
and strain fields of the crack front elements.
Similar to cracks in isotropic materials, the same r-1/2
singularity exists in the strain and stress fields of a crack in
anisotropic material. In the finite element method, the most
common way to embed a r-1/2 singularity near crack field is to
use the so-called quarter-point singular wedge elements along
the crack front. Moving mid-side nodes on the edges
perpendicular to the crack front to the quarter points (as shown

u+ =
v+ =
w+ =

r ( 21 K I + 11 K II + 31 K III )

(14)

r ( 22 K I + 12 K II + 32 K III )

(15)

r ( 23 K I + 13 K II + 33 K III )

(16)

where
ij = Im { Ajk Lki1} .

(17)

In Equations (17), where summation convention applies, Aij is

given by Equations (8a-8b) and Lij is obtained by taking the
inverse of matrix given in Equation (9). Similarly,
displacements at the bottom crack face can also be obtained as
u-, v- and w- from Equation (6). The +, - superscripts
denote upper and lower crack face, respectively.
Fig. 2a depicts a portion of a 3-D crack front with
wedge elements. The labeled nodes are on the upper and lower
crack faces and their displacements are used in Stress Intensity
Factor calculation. It must be noted that the side faces of the
wedge elements must be perpendicular to the crack front. Fig.
2b shows side faces of the wedge elements and depicts how the
mid-side nodes A and B are moved to the quarter points.

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

y
'
rC

y'

C A
D B

lim
r 0

A rA

z'

and as r approaches to the crack tip,

x'

lim
r 0

D
x'

w
r

(b)
C3 =

Figure 2: Nodes on quarter-point elements faces.

Normalized crack face opening u / r variation is

assumed that it changes with r linearly [15]. It should be noted
that a higher order function could also be chosen.
u
r

= C1 + C2 r

(18)

where C1 and C2 are unknown constants. The crack faces

openings at the node pairs shown in Figure 2 are given as,
u AB = u A u B , uCD = uC u D .

(19)

According to the Equation (18), uAB and uCD can also be

written as,
u AB
rA

= C1 + C2 rA and

uCD
rC

= C1 + C2 rC

(20)

The linear equation set in (20) can be solved by using the

relation rC = 4rA,
C1 =

8u AB uCD
3 rC

and C2 =

4uCD 8u AB
.
3rC3 / 2

(21)

As r approaches the crack tip, value of the Equation (18)

approaches to the constant C1 and can be related to the
analytical crack tip solution,

r 0

u
r

= C3 = 2

= C5 = 2

( 22 K I + 12 K II + 32 K III )

(25)

( 23 K I + 13 K II + 33 K III )

(26)

where,

(a)

lim

= C1 = 2

( 21 K I + 11 K II + 31 K III ) .

(22)

The same approach can be applied to v and w displacements

and can be related to the analytical displacement solutions,
v
r
w
r

= C3 + C4 r

(23)

= C5 + C6 r

(24)

8v AB vCD
3 rC

and C5 =

8wAB wCD
3 rC

(27)

Equations (22, 25, and 26) represent three linear

equations to be solved for three modes, i.e., KI, KII and KIII.

NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
In this section, six different numerical examples are
presented to show the practical applicability of the
methodology. First, two dimensional plane problems are solved
and compared with analytical or numerical solutions available
in the literature. Since the ultimate goal of this study is to solve
three dimensional fracture problems in anisotropic materials,
three dimensional crack problems are also presented. Because
reference solutions for three dimensional crack problems are
very limited or do not exist in the literature, the same problems
are solved by a different numerical tool, FRAC3D [2]. Also, the
surface crack problem given in [9] is repeated here and results
are compared.

Edge Crack in an Orthotropic Strip

Using the developed methodology, an edge crack in an
orthotropic strip with remote tensile loading is addressed.
Accurate plane-stress solution of this problem with isotropic
and orthotropic materials is published in [16], in which the strip
is assumed infinitely long. Geometry is shown in Fig. 3a with
the crack length a/b=0.5. The height of the strip is chosen to be
h=10a to approach infinitely long strip solution. Orthotropic
material properties given in [16] are used for comparison
purposes. Also, the problem is solved with single crystal (SC)
and directionally solidified (DS) materials properties given in
[9] to observe the effect of material properties on Stress
Intensity Factors. All material properties are gathered in Table
1. Since this is a plane-stress problem, Equation (3) is replaced
by Mij=sij in asymptotic displacement formulation.
Two dimensional plane stress finite element model is
created and solved in ANSYS. In the FE mesh, shown in Fig.
3b-3c, 1650 nodes and 500 elements (PLANE82) are used. The
crack tip is meshed with 20 6-node singular quarter-point
triangular elements to simulate the singularity. Using associated
post-processing ANSYS Macro, Stress Intensity Factors are

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

calculated and the results are compared with values given in

[16]. The results and comparison are listed in Table 2.

In this section, a plane stress crack problem similar to

edge crack in an orthotropic strip is solved. Instead of remote
tensile loading, uniformly distributed shear loading o is
applied on one end while the other side is clamped. Also,
another difference from the orthotropic strip problem is that the
crack is not aligned with principal orthotropy axis.
Dimensional relations are given in Figure 4. The material
properties in the principal directions, which form an angle
with the x-axis, are Ex=144.8GPa, Ey=11.7GPa, Gxy=9.66GPa
and xy=0.21. This problem is solved numerically in [17] for
= 00, 300, 600, 900 .
ANSYS two dimensional plane stress FE model
consists of 2975 nodes and 990 elements (PLANE82) with 48
6-node singular triangular elements located at the crack tip. The
mesh and the crack region close-up view are shown in Fig. 5a5b. Fracture calculations are performed by using the ANSYS
Macro and the normalized mixed mode Stress Intensity Factors
for = 00, 300, 600, 900 are compared to those of [17] in Table
3. Fig. 6 shows the complete variation of KI and KII with
respect to in increments of 30
KI and KII are normalized by

CRACK FACES

(c)
(b)

(a)

Edge-cracked Orthotropic Plate with Rotating Material Axis

KR = 0

Figure 3: (a) Edge Crack in Orthotropic Strip, (b) ANSYS

global 2D FE Model, (c) close-up view of crack region.

Orthotropic
I
Ex (psi) 8.000E+06
Ey (psi) 2.475E+07
Ez (psi) 8.000E+06
0.0360
xy
0.1114
yz
0.0360
xz
Gxy (psi) 7.000E+05
Gyz (psi) 7.000E+05
Gxz (psi) 3.861E+06

Orthotropic
II
2.475E+07
8.000E+06
2.475E+07
0.1114
0.0360
0.1114
7.000E+05
7.000E+05
1.114E+07

SC

DC

1.871E+07
1.871E+07
1.871E+07
0.3799
0.3799
0.3799
1.846E+07
1.846E+07
1.846E+07

2.505E+07
1.773E+07
2.505E+07
0.370
0.262
0.370
1.807E+07
1.807E+07
0.914E+07

b
2

(28)

Table 1: Orthotropic Material Properties used in Fracture

Analysis.

Orthotropic I
Orthotropic II
SC
DS

KI (psi-in0.5)
Ref. [16]
4.8209
4.8209
-

KI (psi-in0.5)
ANSYS Macro
4.8220
4.8184
5.1745
5.1318

Error
%
0.0228
-0.0518
-

Figure 4: Edge-cracked orthotropic plate

Table 2: Comparison of the Edge Crack in an Orthotropic Strip

Results.

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

model, crack length is taken as 2a and crack angle with respect

to the principal orthotropy axis as =450. Other dimensional
relations are given in the Fig. 7. The material used in this
example is Orthotropic II material properties given in Table 1.
A two dimensional plane stress model was generated in
ANSYS. FE model used in the numerical calculation is shown
in Fig. 8a-8b. The mesh refinement consists of 3600 nodes and
1200 elements (PLANE82) having 24 6-node wedge elements
located at each crack tip.

CRACK FACES

(b)
(a)

(a)
Figure 5: (a) ANSYS 2-D FE Model of edge-cracked
orthotropic plate (b) close-up view of crack region.

(deg.)

Normalized Normalized Diff. Normalized

K I [17] K I (Macro) %
K II [17]

00
300
600
900

8.821
9.852
9.645
8.871

8.8425
9.8671
9.6758
8.9017

1.341
5.066
3.407
1.029

0.243
0.153
0.319
0.346

Normalized

K II (Macro)

Diff.
%

1.3328
5.0458
3.4118
1.0289

-0.611
-0.398
0.141
0.001

Table 3: Edge-cracked orthotropic plate fracture analysis

results using ANSYS.

Figure 7: Center Crack in an Orthotropic Plate

Normalized Stress Intensity Factors

12.0

10.0

8.0

Normalized KI
Normalized KII

6.0

upper crack tip

lower crack tip

4.0

2.0

(b)

0.0
0

20

40

60

80

(a)

(deg.)
Figure 6: Normalized KI and KII of Edge Crack in Orthotropic
Plate vs.

Orthotropic Plate with a Center Crack

Fig. 7 shows a center crack of length 2a placed in a twodimensional plate under uniform applied tensile load 0. In the

Figure 8: (a) ANSYS 2D FE Model, (b) close-up view of crack

region

In the literature, the same problem was solved analytically

in 2-D [4]. The solutions obtained by ANSYS Macro are
compared to those available in the literature in Table 4. The
results are normalized by Equation (29). Good agreement was
obtained between the predicted results and those of [14],

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

having a maximum error of 1.44% for mode I stress intensity

factor.
KR = 0 a
KII

KI

(29)
KI

KII

(upper crack tip) (upper crack tip) (lower crack tip) (lower crack tip)

Sih et. al. [4]

0.5

0.5

0.5066

0.5
0.5041

0.5

ANSYS Macro

0.5072

0.5040

ERROR

1.32%

0.82%

1.44%

0.80%

Table 4: Center-crack in orthotropic plate fracture analysis

results for =450 using ANSYS

The same model is meshed for different values and

variation of upper crack tip Stress Intensity Factors for different
angles ( ) is shown in Fig. 9. Also this variation is compared
to the analytical solution given in Ref. [4], where SIF factor is
given as a function of . It can be seen from Fig. 9 that results
of ANSYS Macro for every are very close to the reference
values having less than 1.5% difference for all the angles.

were chosen as h=b=5c and a/t=0.4 in [9]. Orthotropic I,

Orthotropic II and SC material properties given in Table 1 are
used in the analysis. Due to symmetry in material properties,
geometry and loading, only a quarter of the model is
considered. The crack insertion and meshing of the FE model
are performed in 3DFAS. The FE model consists of 89000
nodes and 54000 elements with 12 singular wedge elements
around the crack front. The complete mesh and the detailed
picture of the tunnel section are shown in Fig. 11a-11c. The
problem is solved using ANSYS and the mode I stress intensity
factor is obtained using the macro developed. The results are
normalized by
a
KR = 0
(30)
Q
where
Q = 1 + 1.464(a / c)1.65 .

(31)

Normalized Stress Intensity Factors

1.2

1.0

KI (Macro)
KII (Macro)
KI - Reference [4]
KII- Reference [4]

0.8

0.6

Definition of
Parametric Angle

0.4

0.2

Figure 10: A semi-elliptical surface crack in a orthotropic plate

0.0
0

20

40

60

80

(deg.)
Figure 9: Variation of Mode I and Mode II stress intensity
factors at the upper crack tip and comparison with Ref. [4].

3-D Surface Crack in An Orthotropic Plate

The problem of a three dimensional surface crack in
an orthotropic plate is presented in this section. The crack is
aligned in such a way that material property with respect to
local crack tip coordinate system always remains transversely
isotropic. This problem is solved numerically by using a similar
methodology in [9]. However, the methodology in [9] is limited
to cases where the crack plane is always transversely isotropic.
Geometric details are shown in Fig.10, where elliptical
crack dimension is given as a/c=0.2. Dimensions of the plate

The normalized Stress Intensity Factors along the

crack front for three different materials are plotted in Fig. 12.
Results of Orthotropic I and Orthotropic II materials are
compared to those obtained in [9]. Also, SC solution is also
plotted to show effect of material properties on Stress Intensity
Factors. In Fig. 12, the angle varies from zero (free-surface c location) to 900 (the deepest penetration of the crack - a
location).
As can be seen from Fig. 12, Orthotropic I and
Orthotropic II solutions are in good agreement with results
reported in [9]. Since, the mesh along the crack front in this
example is relatively much coarser than the one used in [9],
there is a slight difference near the free surface where very fine
mesh is required. The material dependency of the Stress
Intensity Factors can be seen when SC solution is compared
with Orthotropic I and Orthotropic II solution.

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

height of the cylinder is taken as h=5a. Geometry of the crack

and cylinder are shown in Fig.13. In solving this problem, the
material properties for Orthotropic I and Orthotropic II given in
Table I are used. It must be noted that unlike the surface crack
problem, the material is not isotropic in the crack plane. The FE
mesh shown in Fig. 14a-14c consists of 68000 nodes and
41000 elements. In the circumferential direction, 20 15-node
wedge elements are placed around the crack front.
(c)
(a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 11: 3DFAS FE Model Surface Crack in an orthotropic
plate, (a) global view (b) close-up view of crack region (c) tunnel
mesh detail

Figure 13: Circular crack in orthotropic cylinder

Normalized Stress Intensity Factor (KI)

1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8

KI Orthotropic I [9]
KI Orthotropic II [9]
KI Orthotropic I (3DFAS)
KI Orthotropic II (3DFAS)

0.6
0.4

KI SC (3DFAS)

0.2

(c)
0.0
0

20

40

60

Parametric Angle (deg.)

80

(a)

Figure 12: Comparison of Mode I SIF along the crack front for
different material property cases and Ref. [9].

Penny Shaped Crack in Orthotropic Material

Solution of a penny shaped crack problem in an
orthotropic cylinder subjected to uniform tensile remote
loading is presented. Due to geometric, loading and material
symmetry, only the quarter circular model was constructed with
a crack radius (a) to cylinder radius (b) ratio of a/b=1/3. The

(b)
Figure 14: 3DFAS FE Model, (a) global view, (b) crack front
region, (c) close-up view of the tunnel mesh

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Normalized Stress Intensity Factor (KI)

There is no analytical solution for this 3D problem.

However, a comparison with the solution obtained using
FRAC3D [2] is included. The normalized Stress Intensity
Factors along the crack front are plotted in Fig. 15. The angle
, defined in Fig. 11a, varies from 00 to 900. The stress intensity
factors are normalized by KR which is given by Equation (29).
1.1
1.0

The problem is solved using both orthotropic and

isotropic material properties. The isotropic material results are
compared to analytical solution given in [18]. Stress Intensity
Factors are normalized by Equation (29). The normalized stress
intensity factors obtained using 3DFAS for isotropic and
orthotropic materials are plotted in Fig. 18, Fig. 19 and Fig. 20
for KI, KII and KIII, respectively. It is observed that compared to
isotropic material results, orthotropic material case results in
higher degree of variation on Stress Intensity Factors along the
crack front.

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6

ORTHOTROPIC
I (FRAC3D)
orthotropic
I (FRAC3D)

0.5

ORTHOTROPIC
II (FRAC3D)
orthropic
ll (FRAC3D)
ORTHOTROPIC
I (3DFAS)
orthotropic
l (quarter-point)

0.4

ORTHOTROPIC
II (3DFAS)
orthotropic
ll quarter-point)
0.3
0

20

40

(deg.)

60

80

Figure 15: Comparison of Mode I Stress Intensity Factors

along the crack front for different material property cases.

A very good agreement is obtained between FRAC3D

and 3DFAS solutions. It is worthwhile to note that Stress
Intensity Factors vary with and depend on the material
properties. Also, it is well known that Stress Intensity Factors
are independent of material properties when the material is
isotropic. In isotropic material case, this problem would be an
axisymmetric problem and Stress Intensity Factors would be
constant along the crack front and independent of .

(side view)
Figure 16: Slanted elliptical crack in an orthotropic 3-D cube.

Slanted Elliptical Crack in Orthotropic Material

Penny shaped crack problem, given in previous
example, was aligned with the principal orthotropy axis. In
order to demonstrate the full effect of the anisotropic material
properties on Mixed Mode Stress Intensity Factors, a tilted or
slanted elliptical shape crack problem is solved and the
difference between isotropic and anisotropic solution is
presented. Fig. 16 shows an elliptical crack in an orthotropic
cube. Dimensions of the cube and the crack are chosen to be
c/b=3/40 and a/c=9/15, respectively. The tilt angle is 30o
which is a rotation of x-z plane about the y-axis. The angle is
the parametric angle to define the elliptical crack front
locations. The crack insertion and mesh is performed in 3DFAS
and solved in ANSYS. The geometry consists of 73000
elements and 123000 nodes. Since this is an interior crack, only
exterior mesh of the cube and crack plane mesh are shown in
Fig. 17.

(a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 17: 3DFAS FE Model-Elliptical crack, (a) cube exterior
mesh, (b) cube with the crack plane, (c) crack-plane close up
view of the mesh.

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Normalized Stress Intensity Factor (KI)

1.2

ISOTROPIC [18]
ISOTROPIC (3DFAS)

1.0

ORTHOTROPIC I (3DFAS)
ORTHOTROPIC II (3DFAS)
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Parametric Angle (deg.)

Normalized Stress Intensity Factor (KII)

Figure 18: Normalized KI variation along the elliptical crack in

a cube for different material properties.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors used MeshSim (software by
Simmetrix Inc.) for generating the 3D finite element meshes
used in this study. The authors also acknowledge the financial
support of this work by GE Aviation.

0.6

ISOTROPIC [18]
0.4

ISOTROPIC (3DFAS)
ORTHOTROPIC I (3DFAS)

0.2

ORTHOTROPIC II (3DFAS)

0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Parametric Angle (deg.)

Figure 19: Normalized KII variation along the elliptical crack

in a cube for different material properties.
Normalized Stress Intensity Factor (KIII)

CONCLUSION
Quarter-point singular element method represents an
efficient technique for accurately solving three-dimensional
anisotropic crack problems. These elements incorporate the
exact singularity and successfully simulate the stress state at the
crack front. A variety of two and three-dimensional benchmark
problems were run to determine the accuracy of the numerical
approach. The stress intensity factors obtained from the
quarter-point technique were in excellent agreement with the
available closed form solutions and numerical results obtained
using alternative computational approaches. In this report,
various three-dimensional anisotropic crack solutions were
presented in an effort to demonstrate the three dimensional
nature of these problems. It is shown in the numerical examples
that mixed mode stress intensity factors do not change only
with geometry, boundary conditions and loading but also
depend on anisotropic material properties.

0.4

0.2

0.0

ISOTROPIC [18]

-0.2

ISOTROPIC (3DFAS)
ORTHOTROPIC I (3DFAS)
-0.4

ORTHOTROPIC II (3DFAS)
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Parametric Angle (deg.)

Figure 20: Normalized KIII variation along the elliptical crack

in a cube for different material properties.

REFERENCES
[1] Ayhan, A. O., and Nied, H. F.,2002, Stress Intensity
Factors for Three-Dimensional Surface Cracks Using
Enriched Finite Elements, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng, 54,
pp.899-921
[2] Ozkan U, 2003, Stress Intensity Factors for ThreeDimensional Cracks in Anisotropic Materials Using
Enriched Finite Elements, M.S. Thesis, Lehigh University.
[3] Letkhnitskii, S. G., 1953, Theory of Elasticity of an
Anisotropic Elastic Body, Holdan-Day, San Francisco.
[4] Sih, G. C., Paris P. C., Irwin G. R., 1965, On Cracks in
Rectilinearly Anisotropic Bodies, International Journal of
Fracture Mechanics, 1, pp.189-203.
[5] Embley G., 1968, Cracks in Anisotropic Bodies in a State
of Generalized Plane Deformation, M.S. Thesis, Lehigh
University.
[6] Sih, G. C., Chen, 1981, EP Mechanics of Fracture 6, Cracks
in Composite Materials, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,
London
[7] Hoenig, A., 1982, Near-Tip Behavior of a Crack in a Plane
Anisotropic Elastic Body, Engineering Fracture
Mechanics, 16(3), pp. 393-403.
[8] 3DFAS Tutorial, GE GRC
[9] Ayhan, A. O., Kaya, A. C., Loghin, A., Laflen, J. H.,
McClain, R.D., Slavik, D. , 2006, Fracture Analysis of
Cracks in Orthotropic Materials Using ANSYS,
Proceedings of GT2006 - ASME Turbo Expo 2006: Power
for Land, Sea and Air.

10

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

[10] Broberg, K. B., 1999, Cracks and Fracture, Academic

Press, pp.206-236
[11] Suo, Z., 1990, Singularities, Interfaces and Cracks in
Dissimilar Anisotropic Media, Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London, 427, pp. 331-358.
[12] Barsoum, R. S., 1974, Application of quadratic finite
elements in linear fracture mechanics, International
Journal of Fracture, 10, pp. 603-605.
[13] Barsoum, R. S., 1976, On the use of isoparametric finite
elements in linear fracture mechanics,
International
Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 10, pp.
25-37.
[14] Dhondt, G., 1993, General behaviour of collapsed 8-node
2-D and 20-node 3-D isoparametric elements,
International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering, 36, pp. 1223-1243.
[15] Fracture Mechanics, 1989, ANSYS Revision 4.4 Tutorial.
[16] Kaya, A. C. and Erdogan, F., 1980, Stress intensity
factors and COD in an orthotropic strip, International
Journal of Fracture,16(2), pp. 171-190.
[17] Song, C.,Wolf, J. P., 2002, Semi-analytical representation
of stress singularities as occurring in cracks in anisotropic
multi-materials with the scaled boundary finite-element
method., Composites and Structures, 80,pp.183-197.
[18] Tada H., Paris P. C., Irwin G. R., 2000, The Stress
Analysis of Cracks Handbook, ASME Press, New York

11

Copyright 2006 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use