Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 382–391 | Cite as

Effect of thermal mismatch induced residual stresses on grain boundary microcracking of titanium diboride ceramics

  • M. Pezzotta
  • Z. L. ZhangEmail author


The effect of thermal mismatch induced residual stresses on grain boundary microcracking in titanium diboride (TiB2) ceramics has been studied by finite element method. A cohesive zone model was used to simulate the microcracking initiation in four-point bending specimens. In particular, the microcracking was assumed to occur at a grain boundary which is located in the center of the specimen, surrounded by a thermally anisotropic area. The predicted failure strength appears to be significantly reduced by the presence of residual stresses when the cohesive energy of the microstructure is small. The failure load from experiments has been used to determine the critical damage parameters for microcracking initiation in both pristine and aluminum-infiltrated TiB2. A viscous regularization technique is employed in the simulations to improve the rate of convergence of the solution and the effect of the value of the viscosity parameter on the simulation results, has been investigated. The effect of grain size, grain orientation, and number of employed thermally anisotropic grains, on the microcracking is also discussed.


Residual Stress Cohesive Energy Failure Strength Cohesive Element Viscosity Parameter 



This study is part of the research project (2003–2008) ThermoTech (Thermodynamics Applied to High Temperature Materials Technology) at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim.


  1. 1.
    Baumgartner HR (1984) J Am Ceram Soc 67:490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pettersen G (1997) Development of microstructure during sintering and aluminum exposure to titanium diboride ceramics. PhD Thesis, NTNU, Trondheim, NOGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jensen M, Pezzotta M, Zhang ZL, Einarsrud M-A, Grande T (2008) J Eur Ceram Soc 28:3155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Evans AG (1978) Acta Metall 26:1845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fu Y, Evans AG (1985) Acta Metall 33:1515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Laws N, Lee JC (1989) J Mech Phys Solids 37:603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clarke DR (1980) Acta Metall 28:913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pezzotta M, Zhang ZL, Jensen M, Grande T, Einarsrud M-A (2008) Comput Mater Sci 43:440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Turon A, Davila CG, Camanho PP, Costa J (2007) Eng Fract Mech 74:1665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alfano G, Crisfield MA (2001) Int J Numer Methods Eng 50:1701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chaboche JL, Feyel F, Monerie Y (2001) Int J Solids Struct 38:3127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gao YF, Bower AF (2004) Modell Simul Mater Sci Eng 12:453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Samimi M, van Hal BAE, Peerlings RHJ, van Dommelen JAW, Geers MGD (2007) An enriched cohesive zone model for numerical simulation of interfacial delamination in Microsystems. In: International conference on thermal, mechanical and multi-physics simulation experiments in microelectronics and microsystems, EuroSime2007, 16–18 April, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Munro RG (2000) J Res Natl Stand Technol 105:709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    ABAQUS (2006) User’s analysis manual, version 6.6Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hilleborg A, Modeer M, Petersson PE (1976) Cem Concr Res 6:773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hu X, Duan K (2008) Int J Fract 154:3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kovalev S, Ohji T, Yamauchi Y, Sakai M (2000) J Mater Sci 35:1405. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Structural EngineeringNorwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)TrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations