A numerical analysis of ceramics strength affected by material microstructure

  • Toshihiko Hoshide
  • Masahiro Okawa
Testing and Evaluation


To clarify microstructural influences on the ceramic strength, a numerical analysis of the elastic stress distribution around the crack tip for several crack lengths was conducted by using a finite element method (FEM), in which each element was regarded as one grain in a ceramic polycrystal. In the analysis, the anisotropy expected in actual grains was dealt with by randomly assigning different values to the rigidity and the size of each element (i.e., each grain). The FEM results showed that the crack tip stress was dependent on the grain rigidity but was hardly affected by the grain size. A microstructural modification factor f M for the stress intensity factor was newly introduced to reflect microstructural influences on ceramic strength. The factor f M was defined as the ratio of the crack tip stress obtained by the FEM analysis to the K-based stress. Statistical aspects of f M were investigated by generating virtual materials with different combinations of grain rigidity and size. When the f M distribution was fitted to the two-parameter Weibull distribution function, it was clarified that the distribution shifted toward a lower side with increasing the crack length. The R-curve expressed by an exponential form was applied so that the grain bridging effect in ceramics could be included in the analysis of the strength depending on crack length. It was revealed that the estimated scatter band in the relation of the strength versus the crack length represented the central trend of dispersed experimental results.


ceramics fracture mechanics microstructure simulation strength small flaw 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    A.G. Evans and T.G. Langdon: “Structural Ceramics,” Prog. Mater. Sci., 1976, 21, pp. 191–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. Hoshide, H. Furuya, Y. Nagase, and T. Yamada: “Fracture Mechanics Approach to Evaluation of Strength in Sintered Silicon Nitride,” Int. J. Fract., 1984, 26, pp. 229–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Usami, H. Kimoto, I. Takahashi, and S. Shida: “Strength of Ceramic Materials Containing Small Flaw,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 1986, 23(4), pp. 745–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    T. Yamada: “Behaviour of Cyclic Fatigue Strength and Inherent Flaws of Ceramics” in Proc. 31st Symp. Mater. Strength Fract., 1986, 31, pp. 51–63.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Kitazumi, Y. Taniguchi, T. Hoshide, and T. Yamada: “Characteristics of Strength and Their Relations to Flaw Size Distribution in Several Ceramic Materials: Part 1, Static Strength,” J. Soc. Mater. Sci., Japan, 1989, 38(434), pp. 1254–60 (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. Tanaka, K. Suzuki, and Y. Yamamoto: “Residual-Stress Effect on Fracture Strength of Ceramics” in Proc. Int. Conf. Residual Stresses (ICRS2), G. Beck, S. Denis, and A. Simon, ed., Elsevier Applied Science, London and New York, 1989, pp. 15–26.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. Hoshide and T. Inoue: “Simulation of Anomalous Behavior of a Small Flaw in Strength of Engineering Ceramics,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 1991, 38(4/5), pp. 307–12.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Hoshide: “Grain Fracture Model and Its Application to Strength Evaluation in Engineering Ceramics,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 1993, 44(3), pp. 403–08.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Y.-W. Mai and B.R. Lawn: “Crack-Interface Grain Bridging as a Fracture Resistance Mechanism in Ceramics: II, Theoretical Fracture Mechanics Model,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 1987, 70(4), pp. 289–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    R.F. Cook, C.J. Fairbanks, B.R. Lawn, and Y.-M. Mai: “Crack Resistance by Interfacial Bridging: Its Role in Determining Strength Characteristics,” J. Mater. Res., 1987, 2(3), pp. 345–56.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    T. Hoshide and H. Hiramatsu: “A Microstructural Approach to Flaw Size Dependence of Strength in Engineering Ceramics,” Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct., 1999, 22, pp. 1029–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Tada: “A Note on the Finite Width Corrections to the Stress Intensity Factor,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 1971, 3(3), pp. 345–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    R.W. Davidge: Mechanical Behaviour of Ceramics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1979, p. 22.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J.P. Singh, A.V. Virkar, D.K. Shetty, and R.S. Gordon: “Strength-Grain Size Relations in Polycrystalline Ceramics,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 1979, 62(3–4), pp. 179–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    R.W. Rice, S.W. Freiman, and J.J. Mecholsky, Jr.: “The Dependence of Strength-Controlling Fracture Energy on the Flaw-Size to Grain-Size Ratio,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 1980, 63(3), pp. 129–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    R.W. Rice, S.W. Freiman, and P.F. Becher: “Grain-Size Dependence of Fracture Energy in Ceramics: I, Experiments,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 1981, 64(6), pp. 345–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. Kitazumi, Y. Taniguchi, and T. Yamada: “Fatigue Strength of Sialon in Ring Compression Tests,” The Memoirs of the Niihama National College of Technology (Science and Engineering), 1988, 24, pp. 9–14 (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    T. Hoshide and M. Masuda: “Dependence of Strength on Size of Flaw Dominating Fracture in Ceramics,” Mater. Sci. Res. Int., 1995, 1(2), pp. 108–13.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ASM International 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Toshihiko Hoshide
    • 1
  • Masahiro Okawa
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Energy Conversion Science, Graduate School of Energy ScienceKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations