EVALUATION OF J-INTEGRAL OF A STANDARD CRACKED

SPECIMEN USING FEM APPROACH

G. Karthikeyan1 J.Starlin Deva Prince2 K. Velmurugan3

1
Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical Engg, Regional Centre of Anna University, Tirunelveli – 6270067,
2
PG Scholar, 3Scientist/Engineer‘SD’, A&I-ESS, LPSC, Mahendragiri,, er_velmurugan@yahoo.co.in.
ABSTRACT
Abstract:
There are two, parallel ways to investigate the geometry effect on fracture toughness experimental
and computational analysis, the latter referring often to Finite Element Method (FEM).
In this paper FEM is used to study cracked structural components in domain of linear elastic fracture
mechanics (LEFM) and Elastic plastic Fracture Mechanics (EPFM) for determination of J-integral.
Finite Element method proves to be one of the best methods in evaluating fracture parameters. Recent
analytical, experimental and computational studies indicate the Energy release rate (also known as the J- integral)
are the most viable fracture parameters for characterizing crack initiation, stable crack growth and subsequent
instability.
This investigation is on central cracked plate of a finite length. Basically energy release rate (J Integral) is
calculated here analytically and computationally. ANSYS 12.1 is used as a computational tool. J Integral is
calculated and then compared with analytical results and good agreement is noted the approach.

Key words: Fracture Mechanics, Stress Intensity Factor, J- Integral, Centre crack specimen, LEFM, EPFM

Nomenclature
Symbol Variable Unit
E Young’s Modulus MPa
KI Stress Intensity Factor for Mode I MPa m
σ Far field stress MPa
a Crack length mm
W Width of the tensile crack specimen mm
t Thickness of the specimen mm
υ Poission’s ratio --
σ0 Yield Stress Mpa
σu Ultimate Stress Mpa
Jelastic Elastic J– Integral J/mm2
JPlastic Plastic J– Integral J/mm2

Fracture mechanics is the field of mechanics

concerned with the study of the propagation
1. INTRODUCTION of cracks in materials. It uses methods of
analytical solid mechanics to calculate the
1.1 FRACTURE MECHANICS (FM) driving force on a crack and those of
experimental solid mechanics to characterize

1
 the material’s resistance to fracture. Fracture
mechanics has the scope of investigation of
the load carrying capacity of a body with or
without a consideration of the initial cracks
as well as a study of a various laws
governing the growth of cracks.
The crack may exist within a component due
to manufacturing defects like slag inclusion, cracks in
a weldment or heat affected zones due to uneven
cooling and presence of foreign particles. The
phenomenon of failure but catastrophic crack
propagation in structural materials poses problems of
design and analysis in many fields of engineering like
aerospace industry where safety is of paramount
importance.
The mere presence of cracks does not
condemn a component or structure to be unsafe and
hence unreliable. Under cyclic or sustained loading, it
is necessary to know how long an initial crack of a
certain size would take to grow to a critical size at
which the component or structure would become
unsafe and fails.
Also by knowing how a crack evolves and
its propagation, we should be able to estimate the
residual service life of a component under normal
service loading conditions. Standardized fracture
specimens are being used for fracture analysis of
actual engineering components due to complexity of
shape and size, and the results obtained are correlated
to the actual geometry through fracture models.
The process involved in the fracture of
solids are so complicated and varied to an extent that
no single formula of criterion can be expected to
realistically describe all of the observed fracture
phenomena
1.2 Modes of crack
A crack front in a structural component is a line
usually of varying curvature. Thus the state of stress
in the vicinity of the crack front varies from one point
of crack front to another. A segment of the crack front
can be divided into three basic modes as normal to
the crack surface.
i. Opening mode
ii. sliding mode
iii. Tearing mode
Mode I is opening or tensile mode where the crack
surfaces move directly apart. Mode II is sliding or in-
plane shear mode where the crack surfaces slide over
one another in a direction perpendicular to the
leading edge of the crack. Mode III is tearing and anti
plane shear mode where the crack surfaces move
relative to one another and parallel to the leading
2
edge of the crack. Mode I is the most common load
type encountered in engineering design
FRACTURE PARAMETERS
Various investigators have tried to characterize the
crack using different parameters. G is the energy
released per unit extension of crack front per unit
thickness of the body which is an important
parameter to characterize a crack. This was proposed
by Griffith. It is known as strain energy release rate.
This is based on energy released to form two new
surfaces and the materials resistance to it
characterized by each materials unique R-curve. If
the fracture occurs through mode I, then it is
expressed as GI, and similarly for other modes. The
computation of strain energy released rate due to
mode II is difficult. This is because the crack might
not extend in its own plane. On the other hand, for
mode III, the direction of crack growth is pre-
determined. The other parameters are Critical stress
intensity factor, J-integral and CTOD. While G and
critical SIF are based on LEFM, the j-integral and
CTOD are based on EPFM.
If any material can fail that could be estimated
using the fracture parameters, they are,
 Energy release rate (G)
 Stress intensity Factor (K)
 J-integral (J)
 Crack Tip Opening Displacement (CTOD)
J- INTEGRAL
The J contour integral has enjoyed great success as a
fracture characterizing parameter for nonlinear
materials. By idealizing elastic-plastic deformation as
nonlinear elastic Rice provided the basis for
extending fracture mechanics methodology well
beyond the validity limits of LEFM. The assumption
of nonlinear elastic behavior for elastic-plastic
behavior is valid provided no unloading occurs. Rice
used deformation theory of plasticity, which relates
the total strain and stresses in a material to derive the
J integral. J integral is a nonlinear energy release rate
which is independent of path. It represents the change
of net potential energy with respect to crack advances
per unit thickness of crack front. It can be thought of
as energy flow into the crack tip. J is measure of
singularity strength at the crack tip for most cases of
elastic-plastic materials.
J- Integral is a parameter to characterize
crack not only for linear elastic materials but also for
non-linear elastic materials. Elastic- plastic behavior
makes the analysis of fracture mechanics complex
because of the existence of two zones, elastic plastic
zone near the crack tip and elastic zone surrounding
it. Because of this complex problems of elastic-
plastic analysis J- Integral emerged as the most
acceptable method for designers and researchers.
J- Integral represents a way to calculate
strain energy release rate, or work per unit fracture
surface area in a material. The theoretical concept of
a J- Integral shows that an energetic contour path
integral was independent around a crack.
The J- Integral is equal to strain energy
release rate when subjected to monotonic loading,
this is true quasistatic conditions, both for linear
elastic materials and for materials that experience
small scale yielding at the crack tip. The path may be
chosen arbitrarily within the material, but it must be
smooth and continuous.
The two-dimensional J- Integral was
originally defined as,
J= - ) ds
ELASTIC J- INTEGRAL
For Linear – Elastic bodies - J- Integral
represents energy release rate and is same as ‘G’.
Energy release rate in linear elastic case can be
expressed as,
G= = = Jelastic
PLASTIC J- INTEGRAL
The non-linear behavior of material
is conveniently formulated by Ramberg-Osgood
which is found to be reasonably well in agreement
with the material behavior. For one dimensional case
the relation is shown in equation.
ε=
Corresponding J integral is expressed as,
Jplastic = ασ0εοbg1h1(P/P0)n+1
2. FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR
FRACTURE MECHANICS
3
Fracture analysis in actual engineering components is
more involved, might be due to size, complexity of
shape and the ease with which it is made available.
Hence standardized fracture specimens are being
used for fracture analysis and the results are
correlated to the actual geometry through fracture
models. Finite Element method is a powerful analysis
tool for engineering analysis in various fields.
Fracture mechanics deals with the study of how a
crack or flaw in a structure propagates under applied
loads. Solving a fracture mechanics problem using
FEM involves performing a linear elastic or elastic-
plastic static analysis and then using specialized post
processing commands or macros to calculate desired
fracture parameters. In this work, a center cracked
tensile specimen is modeled in Finite element
Analysis package (ANSYS 12.1) and analyzed for J –
Integral using FEA method [2].
J- Integral is a parameter, to characterize a crack. For
a given geometry (Fig. 1) of finite plate of width W
with a centre crack of Thickness (b) with applied
stress () and crack length (a). The expression for
stress intensity factor is presented herewith Middle
crack tension (MCT) specimen shown in figure 1.
Jelastic = -------- (1)
J Plastic = α σ0 ε0 b g1h1 (P/P1)n+1 --------(2)
Total J-Integral = J e + JP -------- (3)
Fig. 1 Centre Crack specimen
In this work ANSYS 12.1 finite element
software, which has the capability to determine the J
–Integral is used for the deterministic analysis. The 13. Calculate J according to equation , using the
specimen geometries are directly modeled in the quantities calculated in
ANSYS software. While modeling for finite element Steps 5-7 and 12.
analysis, symmetric boundary condition is taken into
consideration to minimize the memory and 5. PROBABILISTIC ANALYSIS OF CENTRE
processing time. Element type Plane82 2D with eight CRACK SPECIMEN
nodes can be used. The element at the crack tip is
specially defined due to the singularity problem. The Fracture analysis in actual engineering components is
mid node of the element in line with the crack moves more involved, might be due to size, complexity of
to the quarter position and their by it alleviates the shape and the ease with which it is made available.
singularity problem associated with the element. The Hence standardized fracture specimens are being
analysis was carried out by specifying the stress of used for fracture analysis and the results are
the corresponding specimen and linear elastic - static correlated to the actual geometry through fracture
analysis option was chosen since determination of models. Here the fracture parameter J - integral
stress intensity factor falls within the validity limits analysis of SA312TP316 steel center crack tensile
of the LEFM. Once the static analysis is completed, specimen is done.
using the general postprocessor (POST1), SIF is Table 1. Material Properties
calculated. The POST1 KCALC command calculates Modulus of Elasticity E 206Gpa
the stress intensity factor. Poisson's Ratio ν 0.30
Yield Stress (σ0) 234.5 Mpa
STEPS IN J - INTEGRAL Ultimate Stress (σu) 547.7Mpa
1. Read in the desired set of results.
Command: SET
2. Store the volume and strain energy per
element
Command: ETABLE
3. Calculate the strain energy density per
element.
Command: SEXP
4. Define a path for the line integral
Command: PATH, PPATH
5. Map the strain energy density, which was
stored in the element table in step 1, onto the
path.
Command: PDEF
6. Integrate it with respect to global Y
Command(s): PCALC
7. Assign the final value of the integral to a
parameter. This gives us the first term of Fig.8.7. Stress-Strain Relationship from Ramberg-
equation Osgood Equation
Command(s): GET, PATH, LAST FEA RESULTS FOR J - INTEGRAL
8. Map the component stresses SX, SY, and The Stress intensity factor for J- Integral evaluated by
SXY onto the path. FEA is 71.169 MPa√m.
Command(s): PDEF
9. Define the path unit normal vector.
Command(s):PVECT
10. Calculate TX and TY using the expressions
shown with equation
Command(s): PCALC
11. calculate the derivatives of the displacement
vector
12. Using the quantities calculated in steps 4
and 5, calculate the integrand in the second
term of J [PCALC] and integrate it with Fig.8.8 Stress intensity factor for J – integral
respect to the path distance ‘S’. [PCALC].
The Elastic J- Integral evaluated by

4
FEA is 0.03 J/mm2

Fig.8.9 Elastic J – Integral

8.2.3 ElastoPlastic J - Integral

The Total J- Integral (Elastic Plastic J – Integral)
evaluated by FEA is 0.1179 J/mm2

Fig.8.10 Elasti0Plastic J – Integral

8.2.4 COMPARISON OF J - INTEGRAL
RESULTS
Result comparison of J integral

J-
J- J-
Elasto % of
Elastic Plastic
Plastic Error
J/mm2 J/mm2
J/mm2
Theoretical 0.0259 0.09029 0.11619
0.2
Numerical 0.0300 0.11791

CONCLUSION REFERENCES

[1]. Anderson T.L. (1994), “Fracture Mechanics –

Fundamentals and Applications” CRC press,
New York.

5
 [2]. KareHellan, (1985) “Introduction to Fraction
Mechanics”, McGraw-Hill Book Company.

[3]. Murakami Y., (1987) “Stress intensity factors

hand book” (in two volumes), Pergamon press,
New York.

[4]. Newman Jr.J.C., (1985) “An evaluation of

fracture analysis methods”, ASTM STP 896,
pp. 5-96.

[5]. Parton V.Z. and Morozov E.M., (1978)

“Elastic plastic fracture mechanics”, MIR
Publications, Moscow.

[6]. Robert D. Cook, (1995) “Finite Element

Modeling For Stress Analysis”, John Wiley &
Sons, Inc. (1995).

[7]. Tada, H, Paris, P., and Irwin, G., The Stress

analysis of Cracks Handbook, 2nd edn. Paris
Production, St. Louis, Missoury, USA, 1985.

[8]. Buckner, H. F., A Novel principle fort the

Computation of Stress intensity Factors,
Z.Angew. Math. Mech. 50, 1970, 529-546.

[9]. Barsoum, R.S., On the use of isoarametric

finite elements in linear fracture mechanics,
Int. J. Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol.
10, 25-37,1976.
[10].