Engineering Fracture Mechanics Vol. 50, No. 1, pp.

51-60, 1995
Copyright © 1994 Elsevier Science Ltd
Pergamon 0013-7944(94)00152-9 Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0013-7944/95 $9.50+0.00

B O U N D A R Y ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF T H E R M A L L Y
STRESSED I N T E R F A C E CRACKS
D. KATSAREASand N. ANIFANTIS
Machine Design Lab., Mechanical Engineering Department, Universityof Patras, Patras 26500, Greece

Abstract--Steady-state thermal stress intensity factors in infinite two-dimensional interfacially cracked

bimaterials are evaluated using the boundary element method. The singular behavior of temperature and
displacement fields in the vicinity of the crack tip is modelled through special crack tip elements, while
the transformation of domain integrals to equivalent boundary integrals, combined with the multi-domain
technique, eliminates the need for a domain discretization. The effect of the boundary surface's geometry
on the modelling of the infinite problem, is investigated. The complex stress intensity factor is computed
using the displacement and traction formulas and their accuracy and dependency on the discretization
used, is also examined. Results are given for a wide range of bimaterial properties' mismatch.

INTRODUCTION
IN ORDER to achieve high reliability of components, subjected to extreme temperatures, it is
necessary to determine both the state of stress and, when cracks are present, the stress intenstiy
factors (SIFs) associated with the thermal stress field. The determination of thermal stress intensity
factors (TSIFs), in a body containing a stationary crack, is essential in fracture mechanics, because
their knowledge, combined with an appropriate fracture criterion, can provide further information
about crack propagation.
Sih [1] and Sekine [2] considered the singularities of two-dimensional (2D) thermal stresses in
the presence of a crack and showed that the r 1/2stress singularity is preserved in the thermoelastic
problem, provided that the material is homogeneous. For a thermally insulated crack it has been
proved that, the temperature behaves as r 1/2 and the heat flux as r-~/2 in the vicinity of the crack
tip [3].
In multimaterial interfacially cracked bodies the geometric and material discontinuities
produce complex stress intensification in the vicinity of the crack tip. Thus both opening and
shearing mode stress intensification are present, even for single mode applied loading. This
coupling of stress intensification is closely dependent on the elastic properties of bonded
materials [4]. As a result, the stresses behave in an oscillatory manner as the crack tip is approached
and being bounded by r-l/2 [5]. In general, thermal stresses in cracked bimaterial bodies present
the same oscillatory behavior [6].
Rice and Sih [7] obtained analytical SIFs for an interface crack in an infinite body subjected
to mechanical loading. Lee and Choi [8] obtained SIFs for the same problem using the boundary
element method. The interface crack problem for a bimaterial under uniform heat flow was studied
by Lee and Shul [9] using the complex variable method.
In the present work, the steady-state fracture characterising parameters for an insulated,
traction-free interfacial crack, in an infinite bimaterial structure, under uniform heat flow, are
obtained using a boundary-only element method [10]. The singular behavior of the temperature and
displacement fields in the vicinity of the crack tip, is modelled through the use of the well known
combination, of the heatflux-traction-singular quarter-point element [l l] and the subdomain
technique [12]. Finally a recently developed set of formulas is used for the evaluation of the complex
TSIF [13].

BOUNDARY ELEMENT FORMULATION

In steady-state thermoelasticity, it is assumed that loads are applied slowly, and that diffusion
has been completed. Figure 1 shows a 2D bimaterial medium, under uniform vertical heat flow
51
52 D. KATSAREAS and N. ANIFANTIS

X2
l_I o
az I

-r2
rlJ 2 ~
x1
f
~cI /
fpl
i

QI

Fig. 1. Geometry of a central interface crack between two bonded dissimilar half-planes under vertical
uniform heat flow.

q. The domain f~ is divided, by the interface, into subdomains fi~ and f12, whilst the boundary F
is divided into boundary surfaces F 1 and F 2. The interfacial part of the boundary for each
subdomain is F~ and F 2, respectively. Under these assumptions, the governing differential
equations for each subdomain become

kkO~j+ Sk= 0 (1)

(2k + #k)Uj,ku + #kUuj-

k (32k + 21~k)OtkOk + F k = 0, (2)

where 2k and #k are Lame's isothermal elastic constants, k = 1, 2; F k and S k are the body forces
and heat source; ~k and kk are the coefficient of thermal expansion and thermal conductivity, while
comma denotes spatial differentiation. It is obvious that the above equations are uncoupled, with
the temperature field independent of the displacement field. If an interface crack of length 2a is
present, then boundary surfaces Flc and F~ are introduced; Fig. 1. The direct boundary integral
equations governing the problem are for each subdomain [10]

Ck(¢)ok(¢)+ f Ok(X)ak(x, ¢) drk(x) = f qk(x)O*(x, ¢) dr*(x) (3)

Jr k Jrk

%(¢)uj
k k (¢) + ; r U k ( x ) T k ( x , ¢) d F k ( x ) = ; r tjk (x) Uij(x,
k ~) drk(x)

+ t" [qk(x)O~(x, ¢) - 0k(x)0~( x, ¢)] drk(x), (4)

Jr
where, ujk and Ok are the displacement vector and temperature field, whilst tk and qk a r e the traction
vector and heat flux, respectively. ¢ and x are the source and field points. The free term coefficients
c k and c k depend on the smoothness of the boundary at point ¢. £ k = F k + F k + F k is the boundary
of subdomain fl g, while index k denotes the subdomain at which the above apply. The kernel
functions have the following form

Ok(x, ~) = ,, 1, l n l (5)
ZmCk t
1 dr
Q/(x, ¢) = 2nr On (6)
 Thermally stressed interface cracks 53
,
US(x' ~) = 8n#k(1 -- Vk) L"~" + 6~j(3 -- 4vk)ln (7)

, {Vk)r
T~(x, ~) = 4n(1-~S [(1 -- 2Vk)6~j + 2r,ir,j]-~n - (1 - 2Vk)(r,inj- r,jni) } (8)

--(' + vD~krr,,[-, l ~1 (9)

k'n7 -

--(1 +V,)ak[-[', 1 ni_r,ir,mnml ' (lO)

where, v, is the Poisson's ratio, and n is the unit outward normal vector at x; r is the distance
between points x and ~, while 6ij is the Kronecker delta.
The singular character of the temperature and displacement fields near the crack tip is not
included in the above set of equations, this is performed by utilization of the quarter-point and
traction-singular quarter-point elements. Crack faces are assumed to be traction free and thermally
insulated.
To solve eqs (3) and (4) using the boundary element method, only the boundaries F,k need
to be discretized into a series of elements. For a typical quadratic boundary element, the state
variable is interpolated as
3
w(s) = ~ w'N~(s), (11)
0t=l

where w" is the value of the state variable (temperature, heat flux, displacement, traction) at node
~, while N~(s) is the shape function corresponding to node ~. s represents the natural coordinate
over the element, while subscript fl refers to the type of shape functions selected for interpolation.
When fl = 1 the usual quadratic shape functions are defined over the element. These shape
functions are used everywhere else but the crack tip, where singularities are expected.
The crack presence, and subsequently the singular behavior of the state variables in the vicinity
of the crack tip, demands the definition of different shape functions. To account for this behavior,
the quarter-point boundary element can be used. Then fl = 2 and all the state variables at the crack
tip elements are interpolated, using the following shape functions [11]
Uzl = 1 - 3x/1 + s +2(1 + s )
Uz2 = 4x/l + s - 4(1 + s)
N32= 2(1 + s) - x/1 + s. (12)
These shape functions and their derivatives behave as r ~/2 and r -s/z, respectively. Thus they
represent the same behavior with displacement and temperature fields near the crack tip.
Furthermore, these shape functions obey interelement continuity and compatibility conditions.
Though shape functions (12) model exactly the r ~/2 behavior of the temperature and
displacement fields near the crack tip, this is not the case for the r-5/2 behavior of heat flux and
tractions. Therefore the need for a new set of shape functions is arising. The traction-singular
quarter-point element is defined by the following shape functions [11].

NI- - 3+ 2,/1 + s
~/l+s
N~=4-4~/1 +s
N] = 2~/1 -~s - 1. (13)
It must be noted at this point, that the compatibility and continuity requirements are not fulfilled
by N~.
As it has been discussed earlier, in the case of thermally loaded interfacial cracks, the order
of singularity at the crack tip is oscillating, depending strongly on the material properties' mismatch,
but it is bounded by 1/2 for displacements and - 1 / 2 for tractions. Thus the accuracy of the
proposed model is expected to depend on the magnitude of the mismatch of the bonded materials.
54 D. KATSAREAS and N. ANIFANTIS

X t:

Fig. 2. Crack tip elements configuration.

After application of eq. (11) over each element, numerical evaluation of integrals and
assembly, a set of equations for each subdomain comes in hand [12]

t~/~ /vl~v~ tGk .{ +

By imposing compatibility and continuity conditions at the interface, equations for each subdomain
are coupled to describe the whole domain fl and its boundary F [12]

2
o
J(;it
2
U2j
=
, 0 ]:e'l
G2jtQ~ + It
8,
B~ •

The submatrices corresponding to F ~ and F 2 may interchange after incorporation of boundary

conditions, producing a system of linear algebraic equations, which after solution gives the
unknown values of the state variables at the boundary and the interface.These values are used
to evaluate the thermal fracture characterizing parameters.

COMPUTATION OF THE STRESS INTENSITY FACTOR

Under linear elastic fracture mechanics conditions, stress intensity factors are functions of both
crack geometry and the associated loading. In the present analysis, the thermal loading has been
transformed into an equivalent elastic loading applied on the boundary surface. Therefore, pure
elastic formulae, for the evaluation of SIFs can be used. Two different approaches have been
adopted for the computation of SIFs. Using algebraic expressions relating state variables to the
field intensification characterizing parameters, the obtained nodal values of state variables near the
crack tip are employed to approximate the SIFs. Of the two approaches, the first one is known
as, the displacement formula and utilizes nodal values of displacements, whilst the second is known
as the traction formula and uses the crack tip traction values.
In the fracture analysis of dissimilar elastic materials Rice and Sih [7] introduced the complex
stress intensity factor defined as
K = K I -~ iKll (16)

where, i = x / - 1 . The complex SIF may also be written as

 Thermally stressed interface cracks 55

L
q,, ,,. 1

F-~ ~ 2
/
/
/

/
/
/
// q : O
/
/
/
/
/
t31 /
Fr /
/
//
/
/
,=l - W /
/

4. q=-I

Fig. 3. Boundary element model of the thermally loaded interfacial crack.

K = g o e i~, (17)

where K0 and ~k are the modulus and argument of K, respectively. Thus,

K0 = ~/KI2 + Kll2 (18)

~k = tan-I(Kn/Ki). (19)

Gao and Tan [13] have produced the displacement and traction formulas for the computation
of K0, in the case of a bimaterial interface crack.

Traction formula

ro = "~ -"" [(7,'T + (7¢)q ';: , (20)

cosh ~rE
where, superscripts denote the nodal points defined in Fig. 2 and I is the length of the crack tip
element; e is a constant

E = 2t-reIn 6 (21)

and 6 is a dimensionless parameter depending on the material properties

# 2 "JI- /¢2[~1 '

where x,, k = 1, 2 is

~3 - 4v k for plane strain (23)

Xk = [(3 -- 4Vk)/(1 + Vk) for plane stress.

Displacement formula

Ko = 2X/~ [U2 + V2]1/2 (24)

EFM 50/I--E
56 D. KATSAREAS and N. ANIFANTIS

10-
O0000 (K°t-Km)xlO0/K~o ~.~

--- 5

-5
r/e--O.X444

-10 i i i i i i i i i i i i i J , i i J i i , , i i J , i ~ f

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3

e/a
Fig. 4. Percentagedifferencebetweencomputedand analyticalnon-dimensionalmodulusof complexTSIF
for the steel-platinum combination.

where
U = D1 [ - uf + 4ut° - 3u~] - D 2 [ - u c + 4u~ - 3uf] (25)
V = D~ [ - u ~ + 4 u f - 3u~] - D 2 [ - u c + 4u~ - 3u~] (26)

z), _(1 + 0,J .25 + 2 l,, (27)

cosh ~E k~ e ~ + 6 e -~'

D2 = (1 + 6 ) x / - ~ + E2 /~2 (28)
cosh n¢ k2 e-~c + en' "
It has been shown that the phase angle ~k is related to the crack face displacements as follows
~b = tan-l(Au I/Au2) + E In r -- tan-t(2E), (29)
where, Au~ and Au2 are the relative crack sliding and crack opening displacements, as shown in
Fig. 2. From eq. (29) it is evident that the phase angle ~ is scale dependent, denoting that the
accuracy is sensitive to the selection of the location r on the crack element, where ~, is evaluated.
However, for pure elastic bimaterial problems it has been shown [13] that, there is a certain value
of r at which computed ~ shows good accuracy. For the case of finite domain problems, this value
is independent of the bonded material properties and depends solely on the crack tip element length
l. In general, this position is very close to the middle of the quarter-point element [13].

DISCUSSION OF NUMERICAL RESULTS

In order to confirm the validity of the proposed formulation, computational results are
presented, concerning the calculation of complex TSIF for an interface crack. Computed values
of fracture parameters K0 and ~k are compared with analytical ones given in [9]. The effect of the
thermoelastic properties mismatch of the bonded materials on the accuracy of the boundary
element method solution, was investigated. Fracture characterising parameters are presented for
a central interfacial crack of a finite bimaterial plate subjected to uniform vertical heat flow under
plane strain conditions. Due to symmetry, only half of the domain needs to be discretized. The
geometry shown in Fig. 3 is such that a / W = 1/15 and W / H = 1, [8]. The same, relatively coarse
mesh, was used for both temperature and displacement fields, with 17 elements per subregion. In
all cases, quarter-point elements were used as crack tip elements, with those ahead of the crack
being of the heatflux-traction-singular type, discussed earlier. The effect of the crack tip element
 Thermally stressed interface cracks 57

60
_ _ K.Y. Lee et al, [9]
ooooo K:~,
50 ~A

40

30

20

10

0 ................... ~ ...... ÷ , ~ ...... •

1 0 -~ 10 -i 1 10 10 2
kz/ki
(a)

601 K't
50
_ _
O0000
,~~,~z~,~K'~.,
K.Y. Lee et al, [9]

4o~
30"

20"

10

0 i , , , , , , , i r i r , , , , , t i , , , , N i i , l l , , l

10 -2 10 -1

(b)
Fig. 5. Non-dimensional modulus of complex TSIF vs ratios of thermal properties.

size on the accuracy of the solution was also investigated. Boundary conditions imposed on this
finite domain problem are shown in Fig. 3. Restraint of the right vertical surface horizontal
displacements, ensures zero vertical displacement and traction on the interface away from the tip
o f the crack, which is the case in an infinite domain. Computations were carried out on an Intel
80486 PC using double precision.
The following results were obtained using constant material properties for subregion # 1, that
correspond to AISI 304 steel: #1 = 10.85 x 106 psi, v, = 0.29, k t = 9.4 Btu/hr ft °F and
~j = 9.9 x 10-6in/in °F. The properties for subregion # 2 were taken variable. The non-dimen-
sional modulus of the complex TSIF is defined as

K* = Ko/Kuo, (30)

where Kl[0 is the shearing mode TSIF for the corresponding homogeneous plane strain problem [1]
58 D. KATSAREAS and N. ANIFANTIS

2.5
K.Y. Lee et al, [9]
°°°°° I:'_
2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0 i I 1111111 I I IIIIrl I I I 111111 I I i i i i i i i

10 -I 10 -i 1 10 10 ~
~/~
(a)

1.0
_ _ K.Y. Lee el; al, [9]
***** 111', e q n (~-0)

0.5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0 i , ,lJ,lq , , i~,,N

I0 -8 10 -1 1 i0 I0 z

(b)
Fig. 6. Non-dimensionalcomplexTSIF vs ratio of shear moduli. (a) Non-dimensionalmodulus of CTSIF;
(b) non-dimensional phase angle of CTSIF.

Kilo = 2~1#1 (1 + vt)vqa312.

"/-~ (31)
kt(1 + xl)
Figure 4 shows the percentage difference between the non-dimensional modulus K*, evaluated
using the boundary element method, and that produced by Lee and Shul [9], which is taken as the
exact value for the case of a steel-platinum bimaterial plate structure, vs the non-dimensional crack
tip element length r/l. K* and K,2~ denote the non-dimensional modulus of complex TSIF evaluated
by the traction and displacement formulae, respectively. The optimum position r, at which the
phase angle ¢ was calculated, was taken as r = 0.14441. For platinum the thermoelastic properties
are #2 = 7.66 x 106 psi, v2 = 0.39, k 2 = 40 Btu/hr ft °F and ~t2 = 5 x 10 -6 in/in °F. It can be seen that
the traction formula gives more accurate results than the corresponding displacement formula,
furthermore for big values o f l/a, the error shows little dependency on the crack element length
 Thermally stressed interface cracks 59

1.4

/
__ K.Y. Lee e t al, [9]

A~AA
1.3

1.2

1.1

1.0

0.9

0.8
0.2 . . . . . . . . . . . i.'o ...... i.'4 ...... i.a

(a)

1.0
_ _ K.Y. Lee et taX, [9]

~ 3/', eqn (20)

0.,5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0 i l r l l , i I t,, i, i, i i i i i ~ ~ ~
~.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8
I/2/Vt
(b)
Fig. 7. Non-dimensional complex TSIF vs ratio of Poisson's ratios. (a) Non-dimensional modulus of
CTSIF; (b) non-dimensional phase angle of CTSIF.

and is less than 1%. Figures 5(a) and (b) present the BEM computed K* for various thermal
property ratios, in comparison with the analytical solution given in [9], while elastic property ratios
~2//~ and v2/vj are maintained to unity. High accuracy is demonstrated, especially of the traction
formula.
Figures 6 and 7 present the BEM computed K* and ~b for various ratios ~ . . L 2 / ~ I and v:/v~,
compared with the results obtained in ref. [9], while thermal property ratios k2/k 1 and ~t2/aI are
maintained to unity. From these figures, it can be seen that the accuracy of the computed values
of fracture characterising parameters is affected as expected, from the magnitude of the elastic
properties mismatch of the materials involved.
60 D. KATSAREAS and N. ANIFANTIS

CONCLUSIONS
The boundary element method has been used successfully to evaluate the fracture character-
ising parameters for an interface crack in an infinite bimaterial plate subjected to uniform heat flow.
The method involves correct representation of temperature and heat flux fields in the presence of
a crack, but nearly correct representation of displacement and traction fields, in the vicinity of the
crack tip.
Once more the little dependency of the traction formula's results on the discretization is
illustrated, this time in the case of an interfacial crack under thermal loading.
The results show that, the accuracy of the method is high in the case of thermal property only
material mismatch, which is due to the physical interpretation of the stress intensity factors. In the
case of elastic property only, material mismatch, accuracy of computed K0 and ~k, shows
dependency on the magnitude of the material mismatch. This is due to the crack elements used,
which represent singularity of order 1/2, whereas this is lower and oscillating for very different
adjacent materials.

REFERENCES
[1] G. C. Sih, On the singular character of thermal stresses near a crack tip. J. appl. Mech. 29, 587-589 (1962).
[2] H. Sekine, Thermal stress singularities at tips of a crack in a semi-infinite medium under uniform heat flow. Engng
Fracture Mech. 7, 713-729 (1975).
[3] W. Chen and K. Ting, Finite element analysis of mixed-mode thermoelastic fracture problems. Nucl. Engng Des. 90,
55-65 (1985).
[4] J. R. Rice, Elastic fracture mechanics concepts for interfacial cracks. J. appl. Mech. 55, 98-103 (1988).
[5] K. Y. Lin and J. W. Mar, Finite element analysis of stress intensity factors for cracks at a bi-material interface. Int.
J. Fracture 12, 521-531 (1976).
[6] D. Munz and Y. Y. Yang, Stress singularities at the interface in bonded dissimilar materials under mechanical and
thermal loading. J. appL Mech. 59, 857-861 (1992).
[7] J. R. Rice and G. C. Sih, Plane problems of cracks in dissimilar media. J. appl. Mech. 32, 418-423 (1965).
[8] K. Y. Lee and H. J. Choi, Boundary element analysis of stress intensity factors for bimaterial interface cracks. Engng
Fracture Mech. 29, 461-472 (1988).
[9] K. Y. Lee and C. W. Shul, Determination of thermal stress intensity factors for an interface crack under vertical
uniform heat flow. Engng Fracture Mech. 40, 1067-1074 (1991).
[10] S. T. Raveendra and P. K. Banerjee, Boundary element analysis of cracks in thermally stressed planar structures. Int.
J. Solids Structures 29, 2301-2317 (1992).
[11] G. E. Blandford, A. R. Ingraffea and J. A. Liggett, Two-dimensional stress intensity factor computations using the
boundary element method. Int. J. numer. Meth. Engng 17, 387-404 (1981),
[12] C. A. Brebbia, J. C. F. Telles and L. C. Wrobel, Boundary Element Techniques. Springer, Berlin (1984).
[13] Y. L. Gao and C. L. Tan, Determination of characterising parameters for bimaterial interface cracks using the
boundary element method. Engng Fracture Mech. 41, 779-784 (1992).

(Received 22 August 1993)