Rasmus ÿstergaard forside 100%.indd - Solid Mechanics
Rasmus ÿstergaard forside 100%.indd - Solid Mechanics
Rasmus ÿstergaard forside 100%.indd - Solid Mechanics
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Interface crack in sandwich specimen 307<br />
Table 1 Load-independent phase angle ω (in degrees) calculated for different values of the mismatch parameter and β for η = 0<br />
β = 0.1 = 0.05 = 0.01 = 0.005 = 0.001<br />
0 34 29 20 17 13<br />
−0.1 31 28 23 21 19<br />
−0.2 27 25 22 21 21<br />
−0.3 21 20 18 17 18<br />
−0.4 14 12 11 10 10<br />
Fig. 5 The shift angle<br />
ω ∗ = ω + γ − 90 ◦<br />
determined for sandwich<br />
specimens with thin core.<br />
The dashed line shows the<br />
extrapolation to η = 0<br />
through the values found at<br />
η = 0.1 andη = 0.15<br />
ω ∗ [ ◦ ]<br />
η = h/H<br />
α = 0.8<br />
α = 0.4<br />
α = 0.0<br />
Table 2 The phase angle ω (in degrees) computed with different values of the mismatch parameters and β for a specimen with<br />
thickness ratio η = 0.2<br />
β : 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001<br />
α: −1/3 −1/2<br />
−0.4 27.1 26.1 24.4 23.9 23.0<br />
−0.3 34.6 34.2 31.8 30.5 28.5 27.6 26.4<br />
−0.2 39.7 38.9 35.7 33.9 30.8 29.9 28.4<br />
−0.1 44.2 43.1 38.6 36.1 31.5 30.2 28.0<br />
0.0 48.3 46.7 40.1 36.0 27.7 24.8 19.7<br />
our method, is plotted as function of η for three values<br />
of α and with β = 0. The dashed lines indicate linear<br />
extrapolation to η = 0 using the values found at η =<br />
0.15 and η = 0.1. The results from Suo and Hutchinson<br />
(1989)areω ∗ (α = 0) = 0 ◦ , ω ∗ (α = 0.4) =−4.7 ◦<br />
and ω ∗ (α = 0.8) = −14.3 ◦ . Our results agree with<br />
them with an accuracy better than 0.5 ◦ .<br />
4.3 The phase angle, ω, calculated for sandwich<br />
specimens with finite core thickness<br />
Tables 2–9 present ω for a wide range of material combinations<br />
and face sheet/core thickness ratios relevant<br />
for engineering purposes.<br />
Some selected results are shown in Fig. 6; ω is shown<br />
as function of and η. First, focus on the result for<br />
β = 0 (solid lines). With β = 0 it follows from (4) and<br />
(7) that the real and imaginary parts of the complex<br />
stress intensity factor reduce to classical mode I and<br />
mode II stress intensity factors. Then, ω can be understood<br />
as the phase angle of classical stress intensity<br />
factors for a specimen loaded with an axial force, so<br />
that ω = 0 ◦ corresponds to pure mode I and ω = 90 ◦<br />
is pure mode II. For close to unity, ω is not very<br />
sensitive to η; indeed, for → 1 the results for all η<br />
appear to converge towards the same value. This value,<br />
ω = 49.1 ◦ , which is shown by an arrow in Fig. 6,isthe<br />
value obtained for the symmetric, homogeneous DCB<br />
123