25 views

Uploaded by alenio003

Describes the mechanics of fracture in elastic bodies under loading of various kinds

- BIBIOGRAFIE
- a249068.pdf
- Review of Fatigue Crack Propagation Models
- Machine Design Study Guide
- 30120130405011
- 1093032011082983649609
- Finite Element Analysis
- 10906-41702-1-PB
- Subcritical Crack Growth on Crystallographic Planes Ni Superalloy (1)
- FEACrack_Validation.pdf
- m.tech
- Welding Underwater
- Modified Tension Specimen
- ep_tp_35_00_en
- web5150.pdf
- MF F313 2014 L12
- An Drieu 2014
- MACE43001_MACE61057(2015S)
- 2003 - Ozcan M - Fracture Reasons in Ceramic Fused to Metal Restorations
- Dislocation Nucleation

You are on page 1of 124

Fracture Mechanics

Dr. K. R. Jayadevan

Professor

GEC Thrissur

Outline

Introduction

T.L. Anderson

Introduction

of why things fail

or operation

Application of a new design or material

Definition

maximum permissible applied loads acting upon

a structural component to the size and location of

a crack either real or hypothetical, in the component.

FM can also be used to predict the rate at which

a crack can approach a critical size in fatigue or by

environmental influences.

Or to determine the conditions in which a

rapidly propagating crack can be arrested.

Historical Perspective

is not a new idea

Bridges after

industrial revolution

unexpected failures

Catatstrophic Failures

5000 new US Liberty Ships failed.

Fracture Mechanics as an

engineering discipline

was evolved

Comet jetliner -1952

pipeline rupture - 1993

Milestones in Fracture Research

Inglis, C. E. (1913)

max = nom 12 a/

as --> 0 ,

infinite stress at the crack tip

Griffith, A. A. (1920)

Size effect on Glass fibers

(Griffith's expt)

Actual strength of materials

is much less than theoretical

strength ?

Presence of defects

dE d d

Griffith's law: = =0

dA dA dA

equal to the work required to create new surfaces.

Irwin, G. R. (1948)

Modified Griffiths theory

Gc a measure of fracture toughness

Crack tip fields scales with K ;

Cracks grows, K = Kc , Fracture toughness

Rice, J. (1968)

J-integral ; Non-linear fracture mechanics

MPa m1/2

Fracture Toughness

1.1

6.9 MPa

4340 steel

LEFM:

SIF, K(,a) = Kc

Kc fracture foughness,

a material property

Scope of Fracture Mechanics

KIc vs Failure Mechanism

2a

FAILURE

STRESS

Collapse

Limit load

Analyses

e

tur

Nonlinear

ac

Fracture

Fr

Mechanics

e

ittl

Br

LEFM

Ductile Fracture

Applications

Applied Stress

Fracture based

design

Strength of Materials

approach

Yield Strength

Applied Stress

Fracture Mechanics

approach

Engineering Structural Integrity Assessment

1

LEFM EPFM

K

K Ic

1 / FS

Engg

design SM

regime

0 1 / FS max 1

y

Applications

Fatigue :

da

=C K n Paris Law Threshold SIF

dN

(K)th

da Environmental

=D Kn assisted cracking

dt

ac

Crack length

Damage Tolerance

ad

approach :

ao

Aircrafts, Railways,

t t

offshore structures ...

td tc

Time

Broad areas in FM

Loading Dynamic fracture mechanics

Fatigue

Elastic-Plastic Fracture Mechnics, EPFM

Material response Visco-elastic Fracture Mechanics

Visco-plastic Fracture Mechanics

Environment Hydrogen assisted cracked

Creep

Current Research

Micro-mechanics of Fracture

Mixed-mode Fracture

Nano Fracture

Reference books

Fracture Mechanics T.L. Anderson

M.F. Kanninen & C.H. Popelar

K.R.Y. Simha

Related journals

Linear Elastic Fracture

Mechanics

Atomic view of Fracture

A material fractures when sufficient

stress and work applied at the

atomic level to break the bond

that holds the atoms together.

E E s

c =

xo

than the theoretical one !!!

by magnifying the stress locally

Stress concentration effect of flaws

(Inglis, 1913)

2a

A = 1 +

b

a

A = 1 + 2 ,

=

b2

a

a

When a >> b A = 2

1/ 2

f = s

4a

Griffiths energy balance

(Griffith, 1924)

Based on First law of Thermodynamics :

dE d dWs d dWs

= + = 0 =

dA dA dA dA dA

ie., for fracture to occur, the energy stored in the structure must be

sufficient to overcome the surface energy of the material.

2 a 2 B

1/ 2 = o

2 E s E

f =

a d 2 a

=

dA E

insensitive to

dWs

valid only for brittle matls = 2 s

dA

Modified Griffiths equation

Insensitive to

Apply only for brittle matls

1/ 2

2 E ( s + p )

f =

a

s - Surface energy per unit area

Energy Release Rate, G

(Irwin, 1956)

An energy approach - equivalent to Griffiths model

release rate

G = or Crack Driving Force

dA G is a measure of the energy available

for an increment of crack extension

G reaches a critical value, Gc ie., G = Gc

Gc is a measure of Fracture Toughness

of the material

dWs 2 a

Gc = = 2w f G=

dA E

wf = s + p

Expression for G

The potential energy

of an elastic body, = U Wext U SE stored in the body

Wext W.D. by external forces

1 dU P d 1 dU dP

G= = G= =

B da P 2 B da P B da 2 B da

2

P dC

for both cases : G= , C=

2B da P

dU dU

ie., G is same for both Load & Disp control : Also =

da P da

Instability & R-curve

Stable crack growth:

dG dR

G=R &

da da

Unstable dG dR

>

da da

Ga for CCP

2 (for brittle matls)

Ga for DCB

Material behaviour

Crack & loading confgn

(ductile matls)

Load Vs Displacement Control

on how the structure is loaded

G-a in disp control

than load control

is loaded in Disp. control

Stress Analysis of Cracks

(Westergaard, 1939; Sneddon,1946;

Williams, 1957; Irwin, 1957)

ij =

k

r

f ij A m r m/2 g m

m=0 ij

k a constant

fij a dimensionless funtion of

1

As r 0,

r

; u r

(Stress singularity)

Fracture Modes

A crack can experience three types of loading

Fracture Modes

Load is normal to the crack plane

Tends to open the crack

In-plane shear loading

Tends to slide one crack face

with respect to the other

Out-of-plane shear loading

Each mode causes stress singularity

k, fij depends on mode of loading

Stress Intensity Factor

(Irwin, 1957)

to denote mode of loading : KI, KII, KIII

isotropic liear elastic solid : K -- defines amplitude of crack-tip

singularity.

lim ( I ) = K I f ij( I ) ( )

r0

ij

2r K completely defines crack-tip

conditions.

KI

lim ij( II ) = f ij( II ) ( )

r0 2r

For a mixed-mode problem :

(I )

lim ( III ) = KI

f ij( III ) ( )

( total )

ij = ij + ij( II ) + ij( III )

ij

r0 2r

Mode-I crack-tip field

KI 3

xx = cos 1 sin sin

2r 2 2 2

KI 3

yy = cos 1 + sin sin

2r 2 2 2

KI 3

xy = cos sin cos

2r 2 2 2

[ ]

KI r

ux = cos 1sin2

2 2 2 2 = 3 4 for plane strain

(3 4 )

[ ]

KI r = for plane stress

uy = sin 1cos 2 (1 + )

2 2 2 2

Relation between SERR & SIF

(Irwin, 1957)

G Net change in energy release rate for a (global)

K Characterises the crack-tip field (local)

U

for Linear Elastic case: G= lim

a 0 a fixed load

x = a

1

U = dU ( x)

x =0

; dU ( x) = 2 Fy ( x) u y ( x) = yy ( x) u y ( x) dx

2

( + 1) K I (a + a ) a x K I (a)

uy = ; yy =

2 2x

a

lim ( + 1) K I (a ) K I (a + a ) a x

G= a 0

4 a 0

x

dx

2 2 2

K 2I E' = E Plane stress KI K II

K III

G= ' E : G= ' '

E E' =

1 2

Plane strain

E E 2

Singularity dominated zone

Region where Williams eqns describe the crack-tip fields.

KI

for =0, xx = yy =

2r

xy = 0

near the crack-tip.

field deviates from singular soln.

K proportional to load

K =O a ( ) MPa m

SIF - solutions

Closed form K solns are derived for simple geometries:

2

K I = a K I = 1 . 12 a K I = a

Replace by for pure mode-II loading

Y dimensionless constant depends on geometry & mode of loading

Embedded Surface flaw

flaw

Mixed-mode loading

Use coordinate transformation

K I = y ' y ' a

K II = y ' x ' a

Effect of finite size

2W a

1/ 2

K I = a tan

a 2W

Based on FEM:

a 1 / 2 a

2

a

4

2W W W

(Ref:

Anderson)

(Ref:

Anderson)

Principle of superposition

SIFs are additive as long as the mode of loading is consistent

Semi-elliptical crack

Internal pressure

K I( a ) = K I( b ) K I( c )

= K I( b ) 0

K (a)

I =K (b)

I

Arbitrary loading

replaced with crack face

tractions, if two configurations

results in the same SIF

Design Example

6PL

max = 2 F M approach:

BH

S M approach:

max BH crack)

P y

FS 6F S L K Ic

K =K Ic or K=

FS

Take:

BH 2 K Ic

K Ic =30 MPa m , y =225 MPa , F S =3, P

B=10 cm , H =20 cm , L=1m , a=2 cm 6F S L 1.12 a

Applications

Pd

Pressure vessel : h=

2t

S M approach: F M approach:

y 2t

max P y K =1.12 max a

FS FS d

K Ic

K =K Ic or K=

Take: FS

2t K Ic

K Ic =30 MPa m , y =450 MPa , F S =3, P

d=1m , t =2 cm , a=1 cm F S d 1.12 a

Tutorial - I

Material and Fracture Mechanics approaches ?

SM : = y FM : K (, a) = Kc

KI

G=

E'

3. Write SIF expressions for following configurations ?

b) CT (edge crack) K I = 1 . 12 a

2

c) Penny shaped crack K I = a

Tutorial - I

4.What is the order of the elastic crack tip field near the tip?

1

Stress : (singular)

r

Displacement: r (non-singular)

K Ic =50~150 MPa m

ahead of a crack tip?

KI

xx = yy =

2r

r

Tutorial - I

7. A large plate with a small central hole is loaded as shown ? Is design safe for

= 10 Mpa, if a = 1 mm, Kc = 50 Mpa m1/2, y = 300 Mpa.

SM approach

design is safe

a

FM approach

for an edge crack: K I = 1 . 12 a

KI = 59.54 Mpa m1/2 > Kc = 30 Mpa m1/2

design is unsafe !!

Nonlinear Effects

Plasticity corrections

(Irwin, 1958)

2

First-order : r y=

1 KI

2 ys (Plane stress)

ry ry

KI

Second order : YS rp = yy dr = dr

0 0 2r

2

r y=

1 KI

ys

(Plane stress)

r y=

1 KI

6 ys

(Plane strain)

a eff = a + ry

K eff = a eff a eff

Strip Yield Model

(Dugdale ; Baranblatt, 1962)

A long slender crack-tip plastic zone

in a non-hardening material

in plane stress.

modelled with a crack length 2a+2, with

a closure stress (= YS ) applied at the crack-tip.

r y=

KI

8 ys

&

K eff = a sec

2 YS

Comparison of Plastic Zone Corrections

Plastic zone shape

Applying Von-Mises

yield criterion:

e = y on

Elastic soln

Mode-I plastic zones from FEM

Elastic-plastic boundary

from LEFM

Plane strain vs plane stress

close to the free surface.

Stress prevails.

(Narasimhan &

Rosakis, 1981)

Plastic zone shape Vs thickness

Stress state at the Elastic-Plastic boundary depends on rp / t :

2

K

shape with I /B

ys

from plane strain to

plane stress.

Small-Scale Yielding

K( , a) Stress Intensity Factor

K dominant region

R

Inelastic region

boundary of D

inelastic region

SSY condition

outer boundary of

K-dominant

region

R < D, or B

2

Fracture Criterion

R

1 KI

2 ys

K( , a) = Kc

K as a failure criterion

K defines the crack tip field

A critical K value

Kc Fracture Toughness

( Material constant)

with non-linear matl behaviour.

Effect of specimen dimensions

relaxes

Fracture toughness

Plane strain fracture toughess (KIc)

than plane strain R-curve

plastic zone to the singularity

dominated zone. Usually, K Ic > K IIc , K IIIc

Limits to the validity of LEFM

(a + r ) (a + r )

yy = ; xx =

2ar + r 2

2ar + r 2

a KI

As r 0, yy = xx = =

2r 2r

a

2a Assuming singularity zone, rs = ,

50

2

1 K I

set ry=rs in p , ry =

6 ys

2 2

50 K I* K I*

= 2.65

a=

6 ys

ys

ASTM standard for KIc :

2 the limit of LEFM is:

K

*

a, B, (W a) 2.5 I K I* = 0.35 YS a

ys

ensure P Ensure nominal LE

behaviour

Applications

Pressure vessel :

Minimum Flaw size, given the max pressure

a=

y

K Ic

- geometry dependent

parameter

Importance of Location 4340 steel air frame

K Ic =50 MPa m , y =1680 MPa , F S =4

2 K Ic

2 ac =9 mm

1

K Ic

1.25

ac =3.6 mm

Applications

Pressure vessel :

Edge crack :

Influence of Material 2

ac=

1

K Ic

1.25

ac =3.6 mm

K Ic =50 MPa m , y =1680 MPa , F S =4

K Ic =60 MPa m , y =1200 MPa , F S =4 ac =10.2 mm

Applications

2c

Pressure vessel /

t

Pipelines : a

Part-through-wall

surface crack

Type A

Type B

Type B is more

2ac critical !

Type C

2cc

Leak-before-brake condition (Type A)

Introduction to EPFM

In many materials, LEFM fails to apply.

behaviour (ie., plastic deformation).

- Crack tip opening displacement (CTOD)

- J-integral

Limitations of EPFM

Crack tip opening Displacement, CTOD ()

Proposed CTOD as a measure of fracture toughness

Wells (1961)

2

4 KI

=2u y = (for p)

ys E

In general,

Based on Strip yield model: 2

Burdeking & Stone (1966) KI G

= =

2 m ys E m ys

[ ]

2

KI 1

= 1

ys E 6 2 ys m ~1-2 (p p)

(for Griffith's problem)

CTOD definition

Rice, 1968

FE measurements

Modified Hinge model (V, P)

Load

Vp

Inaccurate, when is primarily elastic KI r p W a V p

= e p =

'

r : Plastic rotational factor 0.44

p m ys E r p W a a

J Contour Integral

Rice (JAM, 1968) Rices J-integral

elastic material

show J as a Nonlinear energy release rate

Hutchinson (JMPS, 1968); in nonlinear elastic and

Rice & Rosengren (JMPS, 1968); elastic-plastic matls are identical.

J uniquely characterises crack tip field in For 3D, it is a good assumption

under monotonic loading.

nonlinear materials.

In 3D deformation theory of

J-integral Energy parameter and plasticity is eqvt to non-linear

elasticity.

Stress intensity parameter.

No unloading

J Path independent line integral

J = w dy T i

u i

x

ds

ij

w= ij d ij ; T i= ij n j

0

Assumptions :

Homogenious hyper-elastic matl

Rice showed that : Small strains

Time independent processes

Plane stress & disp fields

J is path-independent &

Crack face parallel to X

No body force

J = Energy release rate. Traction free crack surfaces

Nonlinear energy release rate

(Rice 1968)

d

J = = U W ext

dA

for unit thickness,

A=a

*

dU dU

J= = or

da P da

P

J=

0

a P

dP =

0

P

a

d

For a linear elastic matl :

2

KI

J = G and J= '

E

HRR Solution

J Stress intensity parameter ( Hutchinson; Rice & Rosengren, JMPS, 1968)

Power law hardening (Ramberg-Osgood eqn)

Elastic strains are small

Stress x Strain varies as 1/r near the crack tip

=

0 0

0

1

ij= 0 2

EJ

0 I n r

n1

ij n , In Integration constant,

depends on n and p/p

n

0

ij=

EJ

E 02 I n r

n1

ij n ,

, -- Dimensionless fns of n and

depends on p/p

Varation of In with hardening

Shih et. al. 1981

Angular stress distribution

(Hutchinson, 1968)

HRR - significance

Importance of HRR soln:

LEFM

singularity

J-integral defines the amplitude HRR

of HRR singularity singularity

within the plastic zone

in plane strain than in plane stress Process zone

Dominates only near the crack tip, well within the plastic zone

Effect of large strain

Exptl. measurement of J

Multiple specimen test : (Landes and Begely, 1972)

rate definition of J

J =

1 U

B a

specimen geometry, temp. etc.

Single specimen test : (Rice et. al., 1973)

=nc c

For deep crack, nc << c

U = M d

0

M c

J =

0

c

a M

2

dM M d c

b 0

In general: Uc

J= is a dimensionless constant

Bb

J CTOD relationship

For LEFM : J =G=m YS

This applies beyond validity of LEFM.

J = YS

=d n J / o - dn is dimensionless constant

critical value of J or CTOD

Varation of dn with hardening

=1

mild dependence on o/E

=1

plane stress, dn=1.0

Agrees with strip yield model

Crack growth resistance curve

an indication of relative stability

E dJ R

T R= 2

0 da

Load control is less stable than

displacement control

J for a growing crack

a growing crack

Deformation J : U D=U D P , a

J D=

1 U D

B a

J controlled fracture

If R << D

R

crack tip conditions

J( , a) = Jc boundary of D

process zone

J-dominant

region

significant crack growth

on the size and geometry of the structure or specimen

Extent of crack tip characterization

K-dominated zone

Stationary crack:

K - dominance

ij

0

K 2I

=F ij 2 ,

0r

: 0r r s

the crack tip field

J - dominance

ij

'

E J

=F ij 2

, : 0r r J

0 0r

charactersizes the characterization

mechanics fails

Large strain region

J-controlled crack growth

elastic unloading

non-proprtional loading

R-curve is uniquely characterised by J

Crack growth under SSY

J

ij

'

1 E J

=F ij 2 ,

0 0r

ij

'

E J a

=F 3ij , ,

0 20 r i

ij

0

=F 3ij

E' J

2

0r

,

Stage 2 : Rising R-curve, under SSY

J R =J R a

J-R curve is a material property

Crack-tip Constraint under Large-scale Plasticity

the crack-tip field : Single Parameter FM

Fracture toughness depends on the size

and geometry of the test specimen

McClintock(1971)

Plane strain,

Non-hardening matl

Slip-line analyses

strain hardening matls, particularly

in bend specimens, so that SPFM

is approx. valid

Effect of specimen & loading

Fracture for a low alloy steel (Anderson 1988)

specimen thickness on

cleavage fracture

Effect of a/W on J-R curves

Towers and Garwood, 1986

initiation of ductile tearing

Joyce and Link, 1993

a = 1 mm

on tearing modulus

Towers and Garwood, 1986

Current Reseach Topics

Two-Parameter

Fracture Mechanics

Elastic T-stress

K, J along with T-stress as the second parameter Hancock & coworkers, 1990

Non-singular stress, parallel to the crack plane.

ij=

KI

2r [ T 0 0

f ij 0 0 0

0 0 T ]

Fracture toughness strongly increases with negative T

T-stress strongly affects shape and size of crack tip plastic zone

KI

ij= f ij T 1i 1j

2r

T- stress depends on geometry

T=

P

f

B aW W

a

, where =

T a

KI

is the biaxiality parameter

J Q Theory (ODowd and Shih, 1991)

2

2

yy yy T=0 r 0

Q at =0 and =2

0 J

Q & T are related under SSY

Evolution of Q

depends on crack depth

J-Q theory

J c =J c Q

Application of

J-Q toughness locus

Micro-mechanics of Fracture

Fracture mechanisms in metals

2

1

1. Ductile fracture

2. Cleavage fracture

3. Intergranular fracture

3 4. Fatigue

Ductile fracture

and second phase particles; the voids

grow together to form a macroscopic

flaw, which leads to fracture.

phase particle by either interface decohesion or

particle cracking.

Void growth: Growth of the void around the particle, by means of

plastic strain and hydrostatic stress.

Void coalescence: Coalescence of the growing void with adjacent voids.

Schematics of various stages in ductile fracture:

1 Inclusions in a

ductile matrix

2 Void nucleation 3 Void growth

4 Strain localisation

between voids

5 Necking between voids 6 Void coalescence

and fracture

Void Growth and Coalescence

Once voids form, further plastic strain and hydrostatic stress cause the

voids to grow and eventually coalesce.

Cleavage Fracture

-- Rapid propagation of a crack along a

particular crystallographic plane

plastic deformation and ductile crack growth

the lowest packing density

polycrystalline materials

in each grains. Nominal cleavage orientation

is perpendicular to the max principal stress

restricted. FCC metals usually no cleavge.

At low temp. BCC metals fail by cleavage.

Multifaceted surface and river

HCP metals also susceptible to cleavage.

pattern is typical in cleavage

Dynamic Fracture Mechanics

Dynamic Fracture

material inertia and strain rate sensitivity

becomes important.

Rapid loading of a a stationary crack

Inertia effects are important for

short time response

Load

Long time response is essentially quasi-static

KIt

ij t = f ij

2r

Time dependent Same quasi.static fns Time

Independent of time

Fracture initiation :

D

K I t =K Ic Dynamic fracture toughness

Rate sensitivity effect on Fracture toughness

Loading rate and

Failure mechanism

Decrease in cleavage fracture HY80 steel

(stress controlled) toughness

at high strain rates

toughness is gets enhanced

Impact loading loading

H(t)

p

H(t)

t

!!! Maximum K d 2.5 K stat !!!

Schematic illustration of explosive damage in Pan Am

Aircraft from the Lockerbie tragedy:

but also at other regions (loaded by traveling stress waves).

Dynamic J-integral

crack tip devided by the crack speed

F

J=

V

[

J =lim 0 W T dy ij n j

ui

x

ds ]

ij

1 ui ui

t

where, W = ij d ij = ij ij dt ; T=

0 0

2 t t

Computational

Fracture Mechanics

Fracture specimens

P(t) = t +

t2

Finite element model of a typical

TPB specimen (a/W = 0.5) and

details of near-tip mesh.

P(t)

Crack tip

element size

5 10 m

E = 200 GPa

= 0.3

= 7,800 kg/m3

.

Kdc K variations

Sharp increase

in

. Kdc around

K = 106 MPa m1/2/s

Proposed dynamic

crack initiation

model is verified

.

Experimental data from

Owen et al., 1998

Numerical

Owen results

qualitatively

agree with

experimental

results.

.

Reeling

Pipe Geometry

D = 400 mm

D / t = 20 t = 20 mm

L = 1200 mm

a / t = 0.1 - 0.5

c / R = 0.04 - 0.3

a = 2 and 10 mm

2c = 25 - 378 mm

Finite Element Model

Crack

Loading

end

1/4th of the pipe model

Mid-

section 20 noded brick elements

30 40,000 d.o.f

Crack front radius :

0.025 mm Abaqus FE package

Results : Expts & FEA

Tutorial-II

2

To account for plasticity correction : r y=

1 KI

2 ys (Plane stress)

with fracture toughness ? Kc stress

Plane

KIc strain

t

Tutorial-II

J-integral

5. Definition of CTOD?

Tutorial-II

w dyT

u

i x

i

ds

contour from bottom to crack face

W strain energy density

Ti - traction

Ui - displacement

1

7. HRR field

Name the variables?

What is the order of singularity?

ij= 0 2

EJ

0 I n r

n1

ij n ,

In Integrationconstant,

, n, o matl constants

depends on n and p/p

depends on p/p

Tutorial-II

Ramberg-Osgood relationship

Deformation plasticity

Proportional loading

Small strain

- BIBIOGRAFIEUploaded byddanutzz
- a249068.pdfUploaded byNathan Paul
- Review of Fatigue Crack Propagation ModelsUploaded byKhalid Saeed
- Machine Design Study GuideUploaded byNancy De Haro Castañón
- 30120130405011Uploaded byIAEME Publication
- 1093032011082983649609Uploaded byavenasha
- Finite Element AnalysisUploaded bymeghatv
- 10906-41702-1-PBUploaded byNilthson Noreña Valverde
- Subcritical Crack Growth on Crystallographic Planes Ni Superalloy (1)Uploaded byJulio Olaves
- FEACrack_Validation.pdfUploaded byAttique Javaid
- m.techUploaded byNALLANKI RAJA KUMAR
- Welding UnderwaterUploaded byAlice
- Modified Tension SpecimenUploaded byJuan Santiago Rodriguez Muñoz
- ep_tp_35_00_enUploaded byAndré Reis
- web5150.pdfUploaded byrukesh104
- MF F313 2014 L12Uploaded byaviruddhjain
- An Drieu 2014Uploaded byValeria Reyes Vilchez
- MACE43001_MACE61057(2015S)Uploaded byLi's
- 2003 - Ozcan M - Fracture Reasons in Ceramic Fused to Metal RestorationsUploaded bydwina
- Dislocation NucleationUploaded byPablo Coll
- Pd 8010-2 Presentation April 2005 NewUploaded byayounga
- 10.1.1.65.8809Uploaded byjorgetapia
- Fatigue Crack Growth Database for Damage Tolerance AnalysisUploaded byk_4_khela1354
- 1-s2.0-S1877705813006723-main(1)Uploaded bygpskumar22
- Shah 1990Uploaded byFrancesco Montagnoli
- Corrosion Fatigue Phenomena Learned From Failure AnalysisUploaded byDavid Jose Velandia Munoz
- Fatigue Durability Fracture MechanicsUploaded bysrashmiiisc
- A numerical procedure for the fictitious support pressure in the.pdfUploaded bycarlos cruz
- ll8Uploaded byMehboob Mehar
- eScholarship UC Item 6f30942cUploaded byVaibhav Phadnis

- 04 ChapterUploaded byLK AnhDung
- 04 ChapterUploaded byLK AnhDung
- Torsion 1Uploaded byEdward van Martino
- Learn Abaquss Script in One HourUploaded bybaspop
- Astm d7137Uploaded byalenio003
- Vulnerability AssessmentUploaded byalenio003
- Is 456Uploaded byKrishen Chaitanya
- Pullout MethodUploaded byalenio003
- Patch Repair Method of Impact Damaged Composite SpecimensUploaded byalenio003
- III Examination Handbook.pdfUploaded byalenio003
- FEM Senior Storage and Solution TechniquesUploaded byalenio003
- Impact Resistance and Damage Characteristics of Composite LaminatesUploaded byalenio003
- Low velocity impact characteristics of sandwich compositesUploaded byalenio003
- Basic Mechanics of Laminated Composite PlatesUploaded bySiva Bhaskar
- Tutorial 1.1a Thin Conventional ShellUploaded byalenio003
- Difference Between General Nd Linear PerturbationUploaded byalenio003

- ASME SEC X 2017Uploaded bySARSAN NDT
- svpwmUploaded byChris Yang
- Standard 4204Uploaded byjairon
- Protein Denaturation.pptUploaded bySubir Das
- 102 - U - Electrolysis.pptxUploaded byAmanda Gaiya
- A Slightly Longer Look at Prying July 2016Uploaded byRaine Hope
- Diffe different_types_of_rt_online.rent Types of Rt OnlineUploaded byRoxanna Alexandra
- GS 01E20C02-01E_AXFA14GUploaded bydiosjireh
- Test Buat UnileverUploaded byNofilia Citra Candra
- Badin ThesisUploaded byRaheelKhan
- Useful_notesUploaded byTapani Henrik Saarinen
- CELMA EcoDesign (SM)263_Consolidated 245 2009 Regulation as Amended by 347 2010 RegulationUploaded byJairo H Pinzón Castro
- Husam's Reconstruction of Schaefer's Formula of Visibility of Crescent Of Luna [Revised]Uploaded byAHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAA"AH [ASHA:'IRAH & MATURIDIYAH]
- SM 15541 TimeWork IUploaded bypavan kumar kvs
- Die DesignUploaded bySalman Akram
- A Kinematic Study of Fin Swimming at SurfaceUploaded bymdaillie
- InTech-Mechanics of Deepwater Steel Catenary RiserUploaded byhiyeon
- IUMRS-ICA 2012 2nd AnnouncementUploaded bykapil
- PURSUIT Newsletter No. 18, April 1972 - Ivan T. SandersonUploaded byufortean
- Micro-Structural Study on Hydration Process of Self Compacting ConcreteUploaded byInternational Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
- UPSC ESE Mechanical Engineering SyllabusUploaded bySandeep Bunty
- Af-200 Universal AngUploaded byGeorgi Kalchev
- AlgebratorManual_50Uploaded byLuis Gonzalez
- The Short Circuit Performance of Power TransformersUploaded byputrasejahtra
- User Manual - Precision Gas Fuel Metering Valve Hfg20Uploaded byNhat Tran
- E1104.1479757-1Uploaded byThaweekarn Changthong
- GM Gas Turbines Frame 5&6Uploaded byDinu
- 10.1007%2Fs10811-016-0789-4Uploaded byNicolaus Anelka
- Design and Construction of a Remote Piloted Flying WingUploaded bylufabao
- Katalog Dalekovod Ovjesna i Spojna OpremaUploaded byUpitnik Kintipu