ON CRACK STABILITY IN SOME FRACTURE TESTS+

JOSEPH GLIJCKLICH
Department of Mechanics, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Israel

Abstract-Generally, cracks that satisfy the energy condition run catastrophically. Three types of exceptions
to this rule are described: ( 1) Stability occurs due to increasing rate of energy demand. (1) Stability ofa
lowet
degree (neutral equilibrium) occurs when the energy reiease is independent of the crack length. 13) Stability
occurs when the energy release decreases with the increasing crack length.
Examples are given ofthe three types of stability and some fracture tests are analyzed from this viewpoint.

1. INTRODUCTION
1-r HAS been established that a crack propagates only after it had satisfied the energy
condition
au aw
a< ac, (1)

where U and W are respectivety the stored elastic energy and the energy dissipated
irreversibly and 2r. is the crack length. It has been shown that when this condition is
satisfied, so is also the stress condition. For brittle, Griffith-type materials, with the
surface energy, y, as the only mechanism for dissipating energy, and for an elliptical
crack normal to a tensile stress (T, (1) reduces to the familiar Griffith equation

E being Young’s modulus.

Generally, when condition (1) is satisfied, the crack runs catastrophically and the
specimen divides into two parts. Many everyday occurrences exemplify this drama-
tically. In the Griffith case this is obvious because. as (2) shows, (r is decreasing with
the increasing c. in a more general form, the value G = - (~~/~~~,), which is the strain-
energy release rate for a fixed length (If of the specimen and known as the crack-driving-
force is, for the Griffith geometry

(3)

This again shows instability due to the increasing driving-force with c’.
However, there are exceptions to this general rule of instability, with cracks remain-
ing stable after satisfying condition (I). This article will center around these exceptions.
The practical importance of this discussion is twofold:
(I) Economic. If cracks can be made stable the material can be made to sustain
higher loads.
(2) ftzstr~rrr~en~alf&r Researck The fracture strength parameters such as y or G,
can be measured only at equilibrium.

*Presented at the Third National Symposium on Fracture Mechanics. Lehigh University. Bethlehem.
Pa.. August 25-27. 1969.

331
334 J. GLUCKLICH

2. PRINCIPLES OF THREE TYPES OF STABILITY

In searching for stability, it must be understood why generally it is non-existent.
The reason is that load is not applied directly to the crack but through the intermediacy
of the material. This in turn stores elastic energy and when the crack growth begins, it
releases energy spontaneously, thus making the driving force an independent force
over which we have no control. With this in mind and with reference to ( 1). it becomes
apparent that in principle three avenues are open for achieving stability:
(1) awl& is not a constant but a fast-increasing function of c so that despite the
fact that - aU/i+c increases with c, the inequality

is maintained.
(2) - aU/ac is made independent of c, i.e. the driving-force does not increase.
(3) - ~~~~~ is made a decreasing function of c, i.e. the d.f. decreases.
The three possibilities will now be treated in some detail.

3. aW/ac INCREASES WITH c

This condition exists in most real materials and it is the direct cause of the stage
of slow crack growth. A crack-containing specimen is loaded (say in tension) until the
condition (1) is satisfied. Instability should then occur, but as soon as the crack begins
growing. aIV/ac, i.e. the energy demand for further growth, increases more than the
increase of --a U/&z due to (3). Thus inequality (4) persists and the growth is checked.
To push the crack ahead, the external load a should therefore be increased so that
- U and hence - aCJ/& be further raised. This is done until condition (1) is again
fulfilled. But once more, with the increase of c, al+‘/& increases faster than - aU/&
and the growth is again arrested. This process goes on- in a continuous, monotonic
manner and not in steps as described here merely for the sake of illustration-until at
some stage the driving force (- au/&) finally exceeds the restraining force (a W/a<*).
and total instability takes hold. The crack thus progresses through a stage of stable
growth and then through one of instability. In most cases the first stage is short in
distance and long in time while the second stage is long in distance and extremely short
in time.
It was stated in the introduction that this work will be concerned with the stabiiiza-
tion of cracks that had previously satisjied the energy condition of instability. The case
of increasing 8 W/k as just described is customarily considered as one preceding this
fulfillment and as such still in the subcritical stage. However, it is here contended that
with the first growth of a crack the energy condition is satisfied whether or not insta-
bility folows. This is so because without this condition (i.e. with only the stress condi-
tion) the crack will not even begin to grow. The only difference between the intermediate
occurrences of the equality (1) and the final one, is that in the former this equality is
immediately followed by the inequality (4), while in the latter it persists. Mathem-
atically, this difference can be expressed by the second derivatives of the energies as
folIows:

Intermediate instability (5)

 Crack stability in some fracture tests 335

Final instability

The causes of the increase in energy demand vary with materials. In plastic mater-
ials (e.g. soft metals) it is the result of the increasing zone of plastic yielding. Since
the stress increase ahead of the crack is limited by the yield value, the increasing dis-
turbance to the original stress field caused by the growing crack is balanced by the
increasing zone within which the stress reaches the yield level. The energy dissipated
by plastic yielding, being proportional to the area of the highly stressed zone. thus
increases with the crack size or. dW/& increases with c. In metals not limited by a
constant yield value, the zone of yield may not grow as much with the growing crack
but the dissipated energy will still increase in the process of strain hardening.
In brittle materials-i.e. materials where under normal conditions of temperature,
strain rate and stress triaxiality, cracking precedes yielding-energy demand increases
through a different mechanism. Minute cracks develop in the highly stressed zone
ahead of the crack. The energy transformed to the surfaces of these microcracks is
‘lost’ from the standpoint of the main crack since the majority of these cracks do not
join to form the main crack. These secondary cracks in most cases do not reach
instability because they are confined to a limited field of stress. (In cases where this
does happen[l], the fracture surface shows a step.) The material adjacent to the frac-
ture plane thus develops the so-called ‘crazes’ and an appreciable amount of energy is
dissipated in the process. Since the stress is not limited by a criticat level (such as the
yield point), the zone of secondary-cracks does not necessarily increase in size but
instead the density of these cracks increase with the growing crack. The result is.
however, the same, namely, increasing a W/&.
Within this category are materials such as hardened cement paste[2], porcelain.
plaster of Paris, PMMA [3] and, as suggested recently[4,5]. even glass.
A related mechanism of the increasing aW/t?c behavior is that resulting from the
heterogeneity of the material. In particulate composites such as concrete[2] or filled
rubbers@] the advancing crack deviates greatly from a plane surface. Thus the number
of broken bonds per effective crack area is greater than in the absence of the fillers.
The difference between the mechanism described before and the present one is that in
the former the fracture surface is plane, with crazes on both its sides, while in the
latter the fracture surface is tortuous and actually includes many of the secondary
cracks. This effect is so strong in filled rubbers that it actually increases the effective
diameter of the tip of the tear[7] and it is regardeti as the main contribution to the
reinforcing effect of the fillers. The rising dW/ac value with the growing crack, the
prerequisite of this type of stability, is due to the increasing number of deviations with
the increasing stress. This is analogous to the increasing yield area in the plastic mater-
ials and to the increasing number of crazes in the brittle homogeneous materials.
Still another cause for the increase of d Wick with c is found with strain-crystallizing
materials such as natural rubber. With the crack growth, strain concentration increases
ahead of it and hence also the orientation of molecules. Thus the number of molecules
to be broken by the advancing crack per unit extension (i.e. the value dW/acs) in-
creases with C. Indeed it has been observed that natural rubber, contrary to SBR for
336 J. GLUCKLICH

example, exhibits a pronounced stage of slow crack growth. It stands to reason that
SBR (and especially filled SBR) will also show some extent of slow growth if certain
favorable conditions, such as an extremely small specimen [5], will be fulfilled.
One last mechanism causing this type of stability is due to viscoelasticity of some
materials, mainly polymers. When a preexisting crack satisfies the energy condition,
it increases its propagation speed from zero to some finite value. The rate of straining of
the material in front of it, being proportional to this speed, also increases. Since the
dissipated energy of a viscoelastic material increases with the strain rate, i3M//irt,in-
creases with &/at. The difference between the mechanisms mentioned earlier and the
present one is, therefore, as follows: while the former mechanisms cause a limit to c
(i.e. c’ = const. and &~/at = 0), the latter causes a limit to &/dt (i.e. c # 0 and &,/af =
const.). In this case, however, some stability is also attained.
In all the above examples the increase of energy demand per unit crack length does
not necessarily come to an end with the onset of final instability. This catastrophic
event is simply brought about by the eventual and inevitable overtaking of the energy
demand rate by the energy release rate although the former may still be increasing.
Mathematically, as resulting from (6), beyond this event

The type of stability just described results from properties of the material. It is due
to the material mobilizing further resistance to fracture in spite of the already existing
conditions to fracture which, as explained earlier, are attained with the first increment
of crack size. Recognizing this type of stability and studying the conditions that lead
to it, we should be able to utilize existing materials to their fullest potential, to avoid
occurrence of premature fracture and to learn to ‘live’ with cracked elements.
The following two types of stability do not result from material properties, but from
geometrical causes.

4. (3U/ac INDEPENDENT OF c
If ---~3U/ac does not increase with c, as it does in the case of simple tension, but is
rather independent of it, then instead of unstable equilibrium we have neutral equili-
brium. This is exemplified by the case of simple compression where cracks, irrespective
of their orientation, grow (if at all) parallel to the direction of the stress. (Hairline
cracks parallel to this direction will not grow since their growth will not release any
energy. Any crack perpendicular to this direction will obviously not grow. But any
crack, no matter how fine, making an angle with this direction, or a crack presenting
some width to the stress field, wili grow, since it releases energy, paraflel to the field.)
To assess the energy released during such growth, this case is reviewed together with
that of simple tension in Fig. 1. In simple tension the energy released, as shown origin-
ally by Inglis[8], is per unit thickness
@‘t
~~=_Eg__.,. 2c -
i 2E 1
.

This energy can, therefore, be looked upon as that contained in an imaginary ellipse
with axes 2c and 4c as shown by a dashed line in Fig. 1, with the rest of the field un-
 Crack stability in some fracture tests 337

au
_=- ,,*b
ac 2E

au aw
-=
ac z= 4Y

SIMPLE COMPRESSION SIMPLE TENSION

Fig. 1. Energy release in uniaxial tension and compression.

disturbed. In simple compression, by analogy, the area free of stress may be considered
to be that bounded by an ellipse containing the original flaw plus its extensions, i.e.
with axes 2b and 2c (also shown in dashed line) where 2b is the front the flaw presents
to the stress field and is constant. This is permissible (with a possible small error) due
to the small disturbance offered to the field relative to that in tension. In compression,
therefore,

The important difference between the two cases is that while in tension any exten-
sion of the crack increases the two dimensions of the stress-free area, in compression
it increases only one dimension. Thus in tension AU is proportional to c2 and in
compression to c. The driving force au/& in the two cases are, therefore, respectively

in tension
au
-=----_= 27rccS
MU”C
dc E 1

in compression
au rrba’
--zzz NCT2
-%= 2E
338 J. GLUCKLICH

where M and N are constants. It is therefore proportional to c in tension and indepen

dent of it in compression. Applying condition (I) to the case of compression for a
Griffith-type material we have
aU
-Z-E-=+
rba” dW
ac 2E ac
(r = (HEY/m-b)‘“’ (11)

which is the counterpart of (2) for compression.

Equation (I I), being independent of c, shows that there is no single valued rela-
tionship between stress and crack length as there is in tension. The neutral equili-
brium in compression is illustrated in Fig. 2. where energies versus crack length
appear on top and forces (i.e. energy derivatives) versus crack length appear below.
The curves show that for a given initial crack c1 the driving force has first to be elevated
to the level 4y where in the case of tension it then spontaneously increases and causes
instability and in the case of compression it remains unaltered. Therefore, in compres-
sion the crack can at this stage be neutral, i.e. remain stationary or assume any size
whatever. In actual fact, however, real materials always have some energy dissipation

ENERGY AND FORCE BALANCE IN

UNIAXIALTENSIONAND COMPRESSION

Ei\ IER( GY EN ER(

FORCE / FC )RC
_-2nm22c
I E
2
I nbc
d” -
I /-z=- 2E

i
-I---
-+-----
aW
x= 4Y

c =1

SIMPLE TENSION
c
4Y

SIMPLE COMPRESSION

Fig. 2. Energy and force balance in uniaxial tension and compression

 Crack stability in some fracture tests 339

mechanism other than surface tension (as discussed in the preceding section) so that
the W curve is not a straight line but is concave upwards. In such a case the neutral
equilibrium will become fully stable equilibrium.
Another example of aU/&z independent of c is provided by the rubber tearing test
known as the ‘trousers’ test shown in Fig. 3. Following Rivlin and Thomas[9], and
because the elastic energy stored in the specimen I/ is a function of both 1 and C, the
change dU of this energy is
dlJ= (g), d,:+($$dl (12)
hence

(13)

Since (aC//~?f),.= F and (af/a~)~ = 2h where A is the extension ratio (A = I +E) and

= 2hF - 2aUo

WHERE U. = STRAIN-ENERGY/UNIT VOL IN LEGS

Fig. 3. ‘Trousers’ tearing test.

340 J. GLUCKLICH

every increase of I, (dl), must be twice (dc) corrected for elastic extension. then ( I3 1
becomes

-(F),= ZhF-(g)$
The last term in (14) is the change of the elastic energy per unit crack growth at con-
stant F, i.e. the change due to the transformation of a volume 2a dc of the material
from the undeformed state to one of simple extension. It is thus equal to 2c1Uo, where
U, is the strain energy per unit. volume in the legs. Therefore,

= ZhF- 2aU,,. (l.iJ

Since the load-bearing cross-section at the root of the tear is very small, the force F.
the stress at the legs of the ‘trousers’ and U,) are all small values. In addition, 2~ is
normally chosen of sufficient size so that CJocan be neglected and A becomes almost
unity. Under such conditions, as (IS) shows, the driving force actually becomes the
externally applied force. Since, by definition, - (au/&), = hG,, ( 15) then becomes

2F
G,. = 12 (16)

which makes the tearing test a very simpie test to conduct and to interpret. In the
context of the present discussion, it is a satisfactory test due to the stability of the
crack or to its independence of the driving force.

5. arllac DECREASES WITH c

It was explained earlier that the spontaneity of the fracture process is due to the
fact that the crack is loaded (in a manner of speaking) not directly but through the
intermediacy of the surrounding material which contributes to the crack growth in an
uncontrollable manner. Therefore, to avoid this, the crack should be loaded directly.
Since, however, there is as yet no such thing as a crack without surrounding material.
the smaller the capacity of the surrounding material to store energy is made. the
nearer one comes to this ideal condition. In fact with very small specimens, or with a
rigid material, or with a very sharp notch so that the stress level in the material away
from the crack is low, the energy release during propagation may be ignored. Since the
total driving force is actually

Total driving force (17)

i.e. the sum of energy release and the external force (cf. force F in Section 4), then
under the above conditions the first term on the right vanishes and the driving force
becomes the externally applied force with the growth being fully controlled. The
effects of the rigidity of the material and the sharpness of the notch were considered
in connection with the tearing test (Section 4). The size aspect of this behavior will
now be examined.
For this, conditions of fixed E, i.e. zero external work, must be assumed. Also, a
 Crack stability in some fracture tests 341

Griffith-typematerial with y as the only dissipative source will be considered. A

specimen of unit thickness and area A has a tensile crack 2c,, small relative to the
width. When the tensile stress CJreaches the level CT,= (2Ey/‘rr~.,)“~ and spontaneous
growth develops, the elastic energy U in the specimen decreases according to the
relation

U= g A-4y(c-c,). (18)
(- 1

The field stress, being u = (~~~~A)“~, then also decreases

CJ={~[(~)A-~~(C--~,)]}~‘~

10
. (19)

The crack will extend only to a value 2c for which the decreasing stress u satisfies (2).
Therefore,
-A-44y(c-cc,) ==2Ey (20)
I

Solving the quadratic (20) for c, we have c = cI and

A
(21)
c=G’
Equation (21) tells us that the bigger the specimen, the farther the crack will
extend spontaneously, i.e. the less control we will have over it. With a very small
specimen, on the other hand, the stress relaxation will be so great that c may be only
slightly bigger than c, so that we will have a fair amount of control. Similarly, a large
initial crack (i.e. a low initial stress) will also result in only a slightly larger final crack,
that is, with some stability. In fact, there should be a critical value for c, above which
there will not be any spontaneousness

A 112
Cltcrit) =
(>_-
471. .
+-
t33)

Equation (22) is not accurate since it is based on (2) which is strictly correct for in-
finite width only. When c, approaches the dimensions of the specimen, as it may do
here, the boundary effect alters this value. In principle, however, such a critical c,
exists, with a value approximately equal to (22).
In an energeticalfy isolated specimen, therefore, the growing crack, consuming
energy as it does, reduces the driving force (~~~~c), very rapidly so that it lags behind
f3FV/& and is soon arrested. Beyond the point of arrest, it will repropagate only in a
stable manner, i.e. with the external force only acting as the driving force. Indeed, if
one starts with an initial crack larger than the value in (22), one has stability right from
the start and this may serve as a convenient test for measuring y.
It may be added here (although already touched upon in connection with the tear-
342 J. GLUCKLICH

ing test) that besides the length of the initial flaw, its sharpness is also a factor which
determines subsequent stability. A very blunt notch will be less stable than a sharp one
because the stress level it will create will be higher and despite relaxation, this level
will suffice to drive it far ahead. With the sharp notch the initial stress will be low and
subsequent relaxation will, after a short growth, cause the driving force to sink below
the necessary level. The outcome will be a controlled growth.

6. SOME FRACTURE TESTS

Some recognized (and some suggested) fracture tests will now be briefly reviewed
strictly from the crack stability aspect. It will concern only materials without the
‘increasing alV/&’ type of stability. Figure 4 shows these tests schematically with the
related information presented alongside.
Test (1) is most familiar. The configuration shown here represents also the edge

CRACK STABILITY IN SOMEFRACTURETESTS

FORMATERIALS WITH C0NST.g
- __I_ T
\lo. TYPE OF TEST DEPENDENC :EUWN CRACK-LENGTH
______
7

I_
/
BOUNDARY
CONDITION
i STRESS OR
FORCE REQD.
FOR
PROPAGATION
I

I-
STRESS OR
FORCE AVAIL
FOR
PROPAGATION
NATURE
OF
CWlLiBRlUM

FIXED 1 DECREASING CONSTANT INCREASING ‘UNSlABLE

P

I_
FIXED F 1 DECREASING CONSTANT INCREASING UNSTABLL

FIXED 4 DECREASING DECREASING DECREASING STABLE

FASTER

FIXED F DECREASING CONSTANT DECREASINC UNSTABLE

FIXED P CONSTANT / CONSTANT CONSTAN’ NEUTRAL

FIXED F CONSTANT ~ CONSTANT CONSTANT NEUTRAL

F!XED F INCREASING CONSTANT CONSTANT 5TABLE

FIXED 1 DECREASING DECREASING DECREASING STABLE

FASTER

I’ FIXED F CONSTANT CONSTANT CONSTANT NEUTRAL 1

FIXED P CONSTANl DECREASING DECREASING STABLE

Fig. 4. Crack stability

FIXED F

in some fracture
CONSTANT
I CONSTANT CONSTANT

tests formaterialswith constantdW/dc.

NEUTRAL
 Crack stability in some fracture tests 343

notch test and the notch bend test, all being similar in principle. The dimension of the
specimen in the direction of the crack growth should be envisioned as large (this also
applies to tests (2). (3), (4) and (6)). As explained in Section 4, the driving force in-
creases with c, even for fixed grips, and the equilibrium is unstable. Therefore, to meas-
ure the fracture strength parameter (such as y) only the point of onset of propagation
can be used. with v and c measured at that point. In the case of fixed grips, the point of
crack arrest can also serve this purpose.
Test (3) is a proposed test where. by starting with a large crack in relation to the
specimen area, stability can be secured for fixed grip conditions (but not for fixed force).
The fracture parameter can, therefore, be measured in any number of points along the
crack progress.
Test (3). a compression test, yields a neutral equilibrium i.e.. no single valued
relationship between stress and crack length. However, from the stress which initiates
growth and from the width of the crack, y can be derived using (1 1). As mentioned
before. some stability of the ‘increasing dW/dc’ type is always present so that the crack
will actually be checked at points. y can be conveniently measured at such points.
With materials without ‘increasing dW/dc type stability, some other energy-
absorbing mechanism can be added to the neutrality inherent in the compression test
to impart it complete stability. This is exemplified by test (4), known as the indenter
test. In this test the circular crack initiates at the tension zone around the indenter. It
then penetrates the material, following the compressive stress trajectories and. there-
fore, assumes the conical shape. Being a compressive crack it is of neutral equilibrium.
However. since the fracture surface increases with c, due to the increasing periphery,
dW/dc actually increases and full stability is attained. Thus y can be measured, using
Hertz’s analysis, at any point along the crack line of advance.
Test (5), sometimes referred to as ‘cleavage test’, yields stable equilibrium in
fixed grip conditions and neutral equilibrium in fixed force conditions. The stability
in the first case is due to the partial unloading of the specimen with the crack growth
(in analogy to test (2)), and the neutrality in the second case occurs because with a
force-controlled loading the wedge will advance with the crack and the force will stay
constant. The stability at fixed grips will make the progress one of ‘stick-slip’ since
both the beginning and the arrest of a growth are discontinuous events. The fracture
parameter can be measured anywhere along the crack path.
Test (6) is the tearing test discussed in Section 4. It is used with rubbers, but here it
will relate only to rubbers that do not possess the ‘increasing dW/dc’ type of stability
(i.e. non-crystallizable and non-filled rubbers). With grip controlled test there will be
a stable equilibrium because with the growth of the tear there will be appreciable force
unloading while the required force remains constant. With force controlled test the
equilibrium will be neutral because in this case there will be no unloading and the
situation is similar to that of test (5). During the tearing of the rubber with grip con-
trolled loading there will be force fluctuations due to the repeated relaxations and
build-ups of the force caused by the structure of the material. Whether the peaks or the
mean values of this force should be used for the determination of the tear-energy, is
yet to be decided.

REFERENCES
[ 11 J. Glucklich and L. J. Cohen, Int. J. Frctc. Mech. 3.278 ( 1967)
121J. Glucklich, T. & A.M. Rep. No. 622. Univ. Illinois (I 962).
344 J. GLUCKLICH

131 J. P. Berry. Fracfurr Procr.ssu.s in Polymeric SolA (Edited by B. Rosen). p. IYS. Intel-science. Lieu
York ( 1964).
[4] D. M. Marsh, Proc. H. SOL..A279.420 ( 1964) trnd Proc. K. Sot. AZS2.33 ( 1964)
[S] J. Glucklich, Strain energy size effect JPL Tech Rep. 32-143X. Aug. ( 1970).
[6] E. H. Andrews and A. Walsh, Proc. phys. Sot. 72.42 ( 195X).
[7] A. G. Thomas,./. Polymer Sci. 18, I77 ( I YSS ).
[S] C. E. inglis. Insr. Nnuul Arch., Lond. 60.2 I Y ( I9 I3 ).
[9] R. S. Rivlin and A. G. Th0mas.J. Po/ymer ,S,,i. 10, 39 I ( 1953)

(KrcYhY%lF!Mtry I YhY)