International Journal of Fracture

, Volume 209, Issue 1–2, pp 171–185 | Cite as

Experimental investigation of fracture under controlled stress triaxiality using shear-compression disk specimen

Original Paper


Experimental investigation of the effect of stress triaxiality on fracture strain has been performed using the shear-compression disk (SCD) specimen. A series of experiments was carried out under quasi-static loading conditions at triaxiality levels in the range of \(-\,0.7\) to \(+\,0.05\). The experiments were designed to generate relatively uniform strain and triaxiality in the sheared zone of the specimen, and a constant level of triaxiality along the entire loading path. The results obtained for SAE 1045 steel are compared to previous studies on the same material which revealed considerable differences. Discussion on possible contributing factors to the differences, and the potential of the SCD specimen for fracture investigations are discussed.


Stress triaxiality (A) Ductile fracture (A) Shear-compression disk (C) Fracture (A) Mechanical testing (C) 



The authors wish to thank Dr. A. Dorogoy, A. Reuven and Y. Rotbaum (Materials Mechanics Center) for their dedicated technical assistance.


  1. Alves M, Jones N (1999) Influence of hydrostatic stress on failure of axisymmetric notched specimens. J Mech Phys Solids 47:643–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Autenrieth H, Schulze V, Herzig N, Meyer LW (2009) Ductile failure model for the description of AISI 1045 behavior under different loading conditions. Mech Time Dependent Mater 13:215–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bai Y, Wierzbicki T (2008) A new model of metal plasticity and fracture with pressure and Lode dependence. Int J Plast 24:1071–1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bai Y, Teng X, Wierzbicki T (2009) On the application of stress triaxiality formula for plane strain fracture testing. J Eng Mater Technol 131(2):021002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bao Y, Wierzbicki T (2004) On fracture locus in the equivalent strain and stress triaxiality space. Int J Mech Sci 46:81–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bao Y, Wierzbicki T (2005) On the cut-off value of negative triaxiality for fracture. Eng Fract Mech 72:1049–1069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Benzerga AA, Surovik D, Keralavarma SM (2012) On the path-dependence of the fracture locus in ductile materials—analysis. Int J Plast 37:157–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Børvik T, Hopperstad OS, Berstad T (2003) On the influence of stress triaxiality and strain rate on the behaviour of a structural steel. Part II. Numerical study. Eur J Mech A Solids 22:15–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Børvik T et al (2005) Strength and ductility of Weldox 460 E steel at high strain rates, elevated temperatures and various stress triaxialities. Eng Fract Mech 72:1071–1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bridgman PW (1946a) The effect of hydrostatic pressure on plastic flow under shearing stress. J Appl Phys 17:692–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bridgman PW (1946b) The tensile properties of several special steels and certain other materials under pressure. J Appl Phys 17:201–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bridgman PW (1952) Studies in large plastic flow and fracture with special emphasis on the effects of hydrostatic pressure. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Bridgman PW (1953) The effect of pressure on the tensile properties of several metals and other materials. J Appl Phys 24:560–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brünig M, Chyra O, Albrecht D, Driemeier L, Alves M (2008) A ductile damage criterion at various stress triaxialities. Int J Plast 24:1731–1755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brünig M, Gerke S, Hagenbrock V (2013) Micro-mechanical studies on the effect of the stress triaxiality and the Lode parameter on ductile damage. Int J Plast 50:49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davidson TE, Uy JC, Lee AP (1966) The tensile fracture characteristics of metals under hydrostatic pressures to 23 kilobars. Acta Metall 14:937–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dorogoy A, Karp B, Rittel D (2011) A shear compression disk specimen with controlled stress triaxiality under quasi-static loading. Exp Mech 51:1545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Faleskog J, Barsoum I (2013) Tension–torsion fracture experiments—part I: experiments and a procedure to evaluate the equivalent plastic strain. Int J Solids Struct 50:4241–4257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ghahremaninezhad A, Ravi-Chandar K (2013) Ductile failure behavior of polycrystalline Al 6061-T6 under shear dominant loading. Int J Fract 180:23–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gross AJ, Ravi-Chandar K (2016) On the deformation and failure Al 6061-T6 at low triaxiality evauated through in situ microscopy. Int J Fract 200:185–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hancock JW, Brown DK (1983) On the role of strain and stress state in ductile failure. J Mech Phys Solids 31:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hancock JW, Mackenzie AC (1976) On the mechanisms of ductile failure in high-strength steels subjected to multi-axial stress-states. J Mech Phys Solids 24:147–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hopperstad OS, Børvik T, Langseth M, Labibes K, Albertini C (2003) On the influence of stress triaxiality and strain rate on the behaviour of a structural steel. Part I. Experiments. Eur J Mech A Solids 22:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hu LW (1956) An experimental study on the fracture of metals under hydrostatic pressure. J Mech Phys Solids 4:96–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Johnson GR, Cook WH (1985) Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng Fract Mech 21:31–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kao AS, Kuhn HA, Richmond O, Spitzig WA (1990) Tensile fracture and fractographic analysis of 1045 spheroidized steel under hydrostatic pressure. J Mater Res 5:83–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Karp B, Dorogoy A, Rittel D (2013) A shear compression disk specimen with controlled stress triaxiality under dynamic loading. Exp Mech 53:243–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kim J, Gao X, Srivatsan TS (2003) Modeling of crack growth in ductile solids: a three-dimensional analysis. Int J Solids Struct 40:7357–7374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kubík P, Šebek F, Hůlka J, Petruška J (2016) Calibration of ductile fracture criteria at negative stress triaxiality. Int J Mech Sci 108:90–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. La Rosa G, Mirone G, Risitano A (2001) Effect of stress triaxiality corrected plastic flow on ductile damage evolution in the framework of continuum damage mechanics. Eng Fract Mech 68:417–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lou Y, Yoon JW, Huh H (2014) Modeling of shear ductile fracture considering a changeable cut-off value for stress triaxiality. Int J Plast 54:56–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mae H, Teng X, Bai Y, Wierzbicki T (2007) Calibration of ductile fracture properties of a cast aluminum alloy. Mater Sci Eng A 459:156–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maigre H, Rittel D (1995) Dynamic fracture detection using the force-displacement reciprocity: application to the compact compression specimen. Int J Fract 73:67–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meyer LW, Halle T (2011) Shear strength and shear failure, overview of testing and behavior of ductile metals. Mech Time Dependent Mater 15:327–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mirone G (2008) Elastoplastic characterization and damage predictions under evolving local triaxiality: axysimmetric and thick plate specimens. Mech Mater 40:685–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mohr D, Oswald M (2008) A new experimental technique for the multi-axial testing of advanced high strength steel sheets. Exp Mech 48:65–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mohr D, Dunand M, Kim K-H (2010) Evaluation of associated and non-associated quadratic plasticity models for advanced high strength steel sheets under multi-axial loading. Int J Plast 26:939–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Papasidero J, Doquet V, Mohr D (2015) Ductile fracture of aluminum 2024-T351 under proportional and non-proportional multi-axial loading: Bao–Wierzbicki results revisited. Int J Solids Struct 69–70:459–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Roth CC, Mohr D (2016) Ductile fracture experiments with locally proportional loading histories. Int J Plast 79:328–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Scales M, Tardif N, Kyriakides S (2016) Ductile failure of aluminum alloy tubes under combined torsion and tension. Int J Solids Struct 97:116–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Spitzig WA (1979) Effect of hydrostatic pressure on plastic-flow properties of iron single crystals. Acta Metall 27:523–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Spitzig WA (1990) Effect of hydrostatic pressure on deformation, damage evolution, and fracture of iron with various initial porosities. Acta Metall Mater 38:1445–1453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Spitzig WA, Richmond O (1984) The effect of pressure on the flow stress of metals. Acta Metall 32:457–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Teng X, Wierzbicki T (2006) Evaluation of six fracture models in high velocity perforation. Eng Fract Mech 73:1653–1678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wierzbicki T, Bao Y, Lee Y-W, Bai Y (2005) Calibration and evaluation of seven fracture models. Int J Mech Sci 47:719–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Aerospace EngineeringTechnion - Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael
  2. 2.Faculty of Mechanical EngineeringTechnion - Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations