PSI - Issue 13

Ivan Shatskyi et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 13 (2018) 1482–1487 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

1486

5

2

       

       

2

2

  

  

  

  

t 

t 

t 

8





 

    

2

2

1

1

1







1 

1 

2 

  

  

  

  

1

t 

t 

t 

,

(15)

3

8

1  





4 1  

t 

1

1







1 

1 

2 

4



1



2 

 

    

2

2

    

  

  

   

1

1

1

2

t

t

t

.

(16)

4







 

 

2 1  

1

1







1 

1 

2 



0 / (2 ) t n h    ,

0 / (2 ) t s h    are dimensionless average stresses of tension and shear, 0

1 / c K l    is

Here

0 0 [ ] /     is relative indicator of the filler strength.

Griffith’s stress for stretched plate with continuous crack,

0   , hence 1 0   , 2 0   ) the equation of the limiting curve will be:

For a plate with unfilled crack (

2

  

   





2

2

8     

1 3

t

t

t

2

2

(17)

.

8 1      t t

  

t

4

4

t 

Let us analyse the mutual location of lines (15), (16) and (17) depending on the values of the parameters and  . The results of the analysis are accompanied with charts (Fig. 1), drawn for 0.5   , 0 0   and various  . The solid line is drawn by the equation (15) and corresponds to the fracture of the plate with a filled crack, while the dashed line is drawn by the equation (17) for the plate with an unfilled defect. The series of dotted lines describes the fracture on insertions for different  in accordance with the equation (16). /    

Fig. 1 .Limiting diagrams of the plate with a filled slit under combined tension and shear.