Issue 30
J. Toribio et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 30 (2014) 182-190; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.30.24
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
a/b
a/b
0.2
0.2
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 m=4 a/D
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 m=4 a/D
0.0
0.0
Figure 7 : Evolution of the aspect ratio a / b with crack growth (represented by the relative crack depth a / D ) for m =4, starting from different initial crack geometries under tension loading (left) and bending moment (right).
0.2
1.2
(a/b) (a/b)
=0.08 =1.00
(a/b) (a/b)
=0.08 =1.00
0
0
0
0
0.8
0.1
f
f
0.4
m=2
m=2
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
a/D
a/D
Figure 8 : Evolution of the dimensionless compliance f with crack growth (represented by the relative crack depth a / D ) for m =2, starting from different initial crack geometries under tension loading (left) and bending moment (right).
1.2
0.2
(a/b) (a/b)
=0.08 =1.00
(a/b) (a/b)
=0.08 =1.00
0
0
0
0
0.8
0.1
f
f
0.4
m=3
m=3
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
a/D
a/D
Figure 9 : Evolution of the dimensionless compliance f with crack growth (represented by the relative crack depth a / D ) for m =3, starting from different initial crack geometries under tension loading (left) and bending moment (right).
188
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online