Residual Strength and Fatigue Lifetime of ... - Solid Mechanics

Residual Strength and Fatigue Lifetime of ... - Solid Mechanics Residual Strength and Fatigue Lifetime of ... - Solid Mechanics

fam.web.mek.dtu.dk
from fam.web.mek.dtu.dk More from this publisher
28.08.2013 Views

mode-mixity phase angle was chosen in the finite element model of the MMB specimen to determine the appropriate lever arm distance (c). It is assumed that because of the mode I dominant loading for phase angles more than -20, the characterisation of the face/core interface for only -20 phase angle and using the resulting crack growth rates for the simulation of STT specimens with slightly lower phase angle magnitudes (-20

Displacement controlled static tests with 1 mm/min loading rate were conducted on two MMB specimens of each core type to determine the static crack propagation load. Typical load vs. displacement curves from the static tests are presented in Figure 5.22. The point where the crack starts to propagate is marked with an open circle (“”). The critical failure load is marked according to the ASTM D6671/D 6671M-06 recommendation and complemented by visual inspection. Load (N) 80 60 40 20 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 2 4 6 Displacement (mm) Displacement (mm) (a) (b) Figure 5.22: Typical load vs. displacement curves (“” onset of crack growth) for the MMB sandwich specimens with (a) H45 core and (b) H100 core. Fatigue tests in displacement control with sinusoidal wave form were conducted on three specimens of each core type at a frequency of 2 Hz and with a loading ratio R=0.1. Displacement controlled testing was chosen for better servo-hydraulic control of the loading and to avoid any unstable crack growth in the MMB specimens. To have a stable crack growth, 80% of the static crack propagation load was chosen as the maximum fatigue load after testing a few trial specimens. The crack length was determined every 50 cycles using the compliance of the MMB specimen as 105 ( 5.1) Where c is the lever arm distance, L the half-span length, is the load partitioning parameter. C1, C2 and C3 are compliances of the sub-beams according to Quispitupa et al. (2009) as introduced in Chapter 3. For further details see Chapter 3. Moreover, visual crack length measurement was performed by a calliper with an accuracy of ±0.05 mm. The maximum fatigue load (Pmax) and the corresponding displacement (max) were used to determine the compliance of the MMB specimens and subsequently the crack length. The MMB compliance in Equation (5.1) is a function of the crack length. Knowing the maximum load (Pmax) and displacement (max) from the testing machine, the compliance CMMB=/P can be calculated and subsequently the crack length can be determined, see Chapter 3. Furthermore, since the MMB test rig has several hinge connections and load introduction points, the deflections of the test rig during the fatigue tests Load (N) 160 120 80 40

Displacement controlled static tests with 1 mm/min loading rate were conducted on two MMB<br />

specimens <strong>of</strong> each core type to determine the static crack propagation load. Typical load vs.<br />

displacement curves from the static tests are presented in Figure 5.22. The point where the crack<br />

starts to propagate is marked with an open circle (“”). The critical failure load is marked<br />

according to the ASTM D6671/D 6671M-06 recommendation <strong>and</strong> complemented by visual<br />

inspection.<br />

Load (N)<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

0 2 4 6<br />

Displacement (mm)<br />

Displacement (mm)<br />

(a)<br />

(b)<br />

Figure 5.22: Typical load vs. displacement curves (“” onset <strong>of</strong> crack growth) for the MMB<br />

s<strong>and</strong>wich specimens with (a) H45 core <strong>and</strong> (b) H100 core.<br />

<strong>Fatigue</strong> tests in displacement control with sinusoidal wave form were conducted on three<br />

specimens <strong>of</strong> each core type at a frequency <strong>of</strong> 2 Hz <strong>and</strong> with a loading ratio R=0.1. Displacement<br />

controlled testing was chosen for better servo-hydraulic control <strong>of</strong> the loading <strong>and</strong> to avoid any<br />

unstable crack growth in the MMB specimens. To have a stable crack growth, 80% <strong>of</strong> the static<br />

crack propagation load was chosen as the maximum fatigue load after testing a few trial<br />

specimens. The crack length was determined every 50 cycles using the compliance <strong>of</strong> the MMB<br />

specimen as<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

105<br />

( 5.1)<br />

Where c is the lever arm distance, L the half-span length, is the load partitioning parameter. C1,<br />

C2 <strong>and</strong> C3 are compliances <strong>of</strong> the sub-beams according to Quispitupa et al. (2009) as introduced<br />

in Chapter 3. For further details see Chapter 3. Moreover, visual crack length measurement was<br />

performed by a calliper with an accuracy <strong>of</strong> ±0.05 mm. The maximum fatigue load (Pmax) <strong>and</strong><br />

the corresponding displacement (max) were used to determine the compliance <strong>of</strong> the MMB<br />

specimens <strong>and</strong> subsequently the crack length. The MMB compliance in Equation (5.1) is a<br />

function <strong>of</strong> the crack length. Knowing the maximum load (Pmax) <strong>and</strong> displacement (max) from<br />

the testing machine, the compliance CMMB=/P can be calculated <strong>and</strong> subsequently the crack<br />

length can be determined, see Chapter 3. Furthermore, since the MMB test rig has several hinge<br />

connections <strong>and</strong> load introduction points, the deflections <strong>of</strong> the test rig during the fatigue tests<br />

Load (N)<br />

160<br />

120<br />

80<br />

40

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!