In fracture mechanics, the principle of linear-elastic strain energy release rate GIc is still widespreadly applied, even though it has a limited validity and questionable interpretation.
What experience do you have and what is your opinion?
With all the enthusiasm and love for GIc, you should know this 👇🏻:
⛔️ GIc is not the fracture energy 𝓖 ⛔️ GIc is limited to linear-elastic, heterogenous and isotropic materials. ⛔️ Notation of GIc is often confused with that of 𝓖 in the literature ⛔️ GIc is dependent of crack length, whereas 𝓖 is not. ⛔️ Values of GIc are too low compared to those of the true fracture #energy due to ignoring post-peak behavior. ⛔️ GIc is a peak value, not a course. ⛔️ GIc ignores plasticity, 𝓖 implies it. ⛔️ GIc is a peak value, 𝓖 is a material law. ⛔️ Specific Fracture Energy GF equals 𝓖 divided by the ligament area of fracture ⛔️ Specific Fracture Energy GF is the area under the stable load-CMOD diagram ⛔️ Specific Fracture Energy GF enables cohesive zone modeling. 💡 Note: The true fracture energy 𝓖 is due to Nakayama 1965: Direct Measurement of Fracture Energies of Brittle Heterogeneous Materials - Journal of the American Ceramic Society.
In the oil & gas industry, Fracture Mechanics principles have been successfully applied in the "Engineering critical Analysis" and "Fitness for service assessment" of pressure vessels, pipeline and others made from steel. There are two industry standards: API 579 and BS7910. None of them uses GIc. For fracture toughness, we use J-integral and CTOD.
@Hillary Yin: Excellent! Thanks for your comment!
However, in the adhesive business, still GIc is extensively applied even in peer-reviewed publications. Either people are doing this by intention or by lack of profound understanding of fracture mechanics.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Waves