Cohesive Technology Applied to the Modeling and Simulation of Fatigue Failure

  • Spandan Maiti


Estimation of fatigue and fracture properties of materials is essential for the safe life estimation of aging structural components. Standard ASTM testing procedures being time consuming and costly, computational methods that can reliably predict fatigue properties of the material will be very useful. Toward this end, we present a computational model that can capture the entire Paris curve for a material. The model is based on a damage-dependent irreversible cohesive failure formulation. The model relies on a combination of a bilinear cohesive failure law and an evolution law relating the cohesive stiffness, the rate of crack opening displacement, and number of cycles since the onset of failure. Threshold behavior of the fatigue crack propagation is determined by the initial value of the damage parameter of the cohesive failure law, while the accelerated region is the natural outcome of the cohesive formulation. The Paris region can be readily calibrated with the two parameters of the proposed cohesive model. We compare the simulation results with the NASGRO material database, and show that the threshold region is adequately captured by the proposed model. We summarize a semi-implicit implementation of the proposed model into a cohesive-volumetric finite element framework, allowing for the simulation of a wide range of fatigue problems.


Fatigue Crack Fatigue Crack Growth Crack Opening Displacement Crack Closure Fatigue Crack Propagation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    R. Sunder, “A unified model of fatigue kinetics based on crack driving force and material resistance,” Int. J. Fatigue, Vol. 29, No. 9–11, 2007, pp. 1681–1696.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. Farahmand and S. maiti, “Estimation of threshold of fatigue crack growth curve for aerospace alloys,” Aging Aircraft 2008, Phoenix, 2008.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Suresh, Fatigue of Materials, 2nd edition, Cambridge University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Paris and F. Erdogan, “A Critical Analysis of Crack Propagation,” J. Basic Eng., Vol. 85, 1963, pp. 528–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Vasudevan, K. Sadananda, and N. Louat, “A Review of Crack Closure, Fatigue Crack Threshold and Related Phenomena,” Int. J. Fatigue, Vol. 18, No. 1, 1996, p. 62.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    W. Elber, “Fatigue Crack Closure Under Cyclic Tension,” Eng. Frac. Mech., Vol. 2, 1970, pp. 37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    J.C. Newman, “A Finite Element Analysis of Fatigue Crack Closure,” ASTM STP 590, 1976, pp. 281–301.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    B. Budiansky and J.W. Hutchinson, “Analysis of Closure in Fatigue Crack Growth,” J. Appl. Mech., Vol. 45, 1978, pp. 267–276.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J.T. Gray, J.C. William, and A.W. Thompson, “Roughness Induced Crack Closure; Explaination of Microstructurally Sensitive Fatigue Crack Behavior,” Metallurgical Trans., Vol. 14A, 1983, pp. 421–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Weertman, “The Paris Exponent and Dislocation Crack Tip Shielding,” In: High Cycle Fatigue of Strutcutral Materials, TMS Publication, 1997, pp. 41–48.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    B. Farahmand, “Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics of High Risk Parts,” Chapman and Hall, 1997.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    V.S. Deshpande, A. Needleman, and E. Van Der Giessen, “A Discrete Dislocation Analysis of Near Threshold Fatigue Crack Growth,” Acta Materialia, Vol. 49, No. 16, 2001, pp. 3189--3203.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    V. Deshpande, A. Needleman, and E. Van der Giessen, “Discrete Dislocation Modeling of Fatigue Crack Propagation,” Acta Materialia, Vol. 50, No.4, 2002, pp. 831–846.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    V. Deshpande, A. Needleman, and E. Van der Giessen, “Discrete Dislocation Plasticity Modeling of Short Cracks in Single Crystals,” Acta Materialia, Vol. 51, No. 1, 2003, pp. 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    V. Deshpande, A. Needleman, and E. Van der Giessen, “Scaling of Discrete Dislocation Predictions for Near-Threshold Fatigue Crack Growth,” Acta Materialia, Vol. 51, No. 15, 2003, pp. 4637–4651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. Farkas, M. Willemann, and B. Hyde, “Atomistic Mechanisms of Fatigue in Nanocrystalline Metals,” 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.165502, 2005.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    S. Roychowdhury and R.H. Dodds, Jr., “A Numerical Investigation of 3-D Small-Scale Yielding Fatigue Crack Growth,” Eng. Frac. Mech., Vol. 70, 2003, pp. 2363–2383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    S. Roychowdhury and R. H. Dodds, Jr., “Effect of T-stress on Fatigue Crack Closure in 3-D Small-Scale Yielding,” Int. J. Solids Struct., Vol. 41, 2004, pp. 2581–2606.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Wu and F. Ellyin, “A Study of Fatigue Crack Closure by Elasto-Plastic Finite Element Analysis for Constant-Amplitude Loading,” Int. J. Fract., Vol. 82, 1996, pp. 43–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    A.G. Carlyle and R.H. Dodds, Jr., “Three-Dimensional Effects on Fatigue Crack Closure under Fully-Reversed Loading,” Eng. Frac. Mech., Vol. 74, 2007, pp. 457–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    A. de-Andres, J.L. Pe´rez, and M. Ortiz, “Elastoplastic Finite Element Analysis of Three-Dimensional Fatigue Crack Growth in Aluminium Shafts Subjected to Axial Loading,” Int. J. Solids Struct., Vol. 36, 1999, pp. 2231–2258.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    O. Nguyen, E.A. Repetto, M. Ortiz, and R.A. Radovitzky, “A Cohesive Model of Fatigue Crack Growth,” Int. J. Frac., Vol. 110, 2001, pp. 351–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    K.L. Roe and T. Siegmund, “An Irreversible Cohesive Zone Model for Fatigue Crack Initiation,” Eng. Frac. Mech., Vol. 70, 2002, pp. 209–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    B. Yang, S. mall, and K. ravi-Chandar, “A Cohesive Zone Model for Fatigue Crack Growth in Quasibrittle Materials,” Int. J. Solids Struct., Vol. 38, 2001, pp. 3927–3944.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    S. Maiti and P.H. Geubelle, “A Cohesive Model for Fatigue Failure of Polymers,” Eng. Frac. Mech., Vol. 72, 2004, pp. 691–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    S. Maiti and P.H. Geubelle, “Cohesive Modeing of Fatigue Crack Retardationin Polymers: Crack Closure Effect,” Eng. Frac. Mech., Vol. 73, 2006, pp. 22–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    S. Maiti, C. Shankar, P.H. Geubelle, and J. Kieffer, “Continuum and Molecular-Level Modeling of Fatigue Crack Retardation in Self-Healing Polymers,” J. Eng. Mat. Tech., Vol. 128, 2006, pp. 595–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    A.A. Griffith, “The Phenomenon of Rupture and Flow in Solids,” Philos. Trans. R Soc. Lond., Vol. 221, 1920.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    D.S. Dugdale, “Yielding of Steel Sheets Containing Slits,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1960, pp. 100–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    G.I. Barenblatt, “The Mathematical Theory of Equilibrium of Cracks in Brittle Fracture,” Adv. Appl. Mech., Vol. 7, 1962, pp. 55–129.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    G.T. Camacho and M. Ortiz, “Computational Modelling of Impact Damage in Brittle Materials,” Int. J. Solids Struc., Vol. 33, 1996, pp. 2899–2938.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    X. Xu and A. Needleman, “Numerical Simulations of Fast Crack Growth in Brittle Solids,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids., Vol. 42, No. 9, 1994, pp. 1397–1407.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    P. Geubelle and J. Baylor, “Impact-Induced Delamination of Composites: a 2 D Simulation” Composites Part B, Vol. 29B, 1998, pp. 589–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    R.O. Ritchie, “Mechanisms of Fatigue-Crack Propagation in Ductile,” Int. J. Frac., Vol. 100, 1999, pp. 55–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    R.O. Ritchie, V. Schroeder, and C.J. Gilbert, “Fracture, Fatigue and Environmentally-Assisted Failure of a Zr-based Bulk Amorphous Metal,” Intermetallics, Vol. 8, No. 5–6, 2000, pp. 469–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    J. Blacktop and R. Brook, “Compendium,” Eng. Fract. Mech., Vol. 12, 1979, pp. 619–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    T.M. Ahmed and D. Tromans, “Fatigue Threshold Behavior of Alpha Phase Alloys in Desiccated Air: Modulus Effect,” Int. J. Fatigue, Vol. 21, 2004, pp. 641–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    B.L. Boyce and R.O. Ritchie, “Effect of Load Ratio and Maximum Stress Intensity on the Fatigue Threshold in Ti-6Al-4 V,” Eng. Frac. Mech., Vol. 68, 2000, pp. 129–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    R. Schmidt and P. Paris, “Threshold for Fatigue Crack Propagation and the Effects of Load Ratio and Frequency,” Progress in Flaw Growth and Fracture Toughness Testing, ASTM STP 536, ASTM, Philadelphia, 1973, pp. 79–94.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    S. Suresh, G.F. Zamiski, and R.O. Ritchie, “Oxide-Induced Crack Closure: An Explanation for Near-Threshold Corrosion Fatigue Crack Growth Behavior,” Metallurgical Mater. Trans. A, Vol. 12, No. 8, 1981, pp. 1435–1443.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    D. Davidson, Damage Mechanisms in High Cycle Fatigue. AFOSR Final Report, Project 06-8243. Southwest Research Institute, 1998.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    L. Lawson, E.Y. Chen and M. Meshii, “Near-Threshold Fatigue: A Review,” Int. J. Fatigue, Vol. 21, 1999, pp. S15–S34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering–Engineering MechanicsMichigan Technological UniversityHoughtonUSA

Personalised recommendations