Effect of disorder on the fracture of materials

$Page 1: Effect of disorder on the fracture of materials$
Effect of disorder on the

fracture of materialsElisabeth Bouchaud

Solid State Physics Division (SPEC)CEA-Saclay, France

MATGEN IV, Lerici, ItalySeptember 19-23, 2011

Irradiation defects in solids

Vacancy Interstitial FrenkelOther « defects » Good compromise of

mechanical properties

Metallic alloys(ONERA)

ToughenedPolymer(ESPCI)

Fiber composite(Columbia)

Tough ceramics(Berkeley)

How to estimate the properties of a composite?

s

s

Ecomposite F E + F E

sr= F sr + F sr

Include the effect of heterogeneities in a statistical description

- Rare events statistics- Strong stress gradients in the vicinity of a crack tip

OUTLINE1. Elements of LEFM2. Effect of disorder on the morphology

and dynamics of the crack front3. Experimental observations4. Discussion

1- Elements of LEFM

s

s

a

A crude estimate of the strength to failure

s=E Dxa

Failure : Dx≈a sf ≈ E

sf ≈ E/100

Presence of flaws!

Stress concentration at a crack tip (Inglis 1913)

s

s

2b

2a

AsA > s: stress concentration

)21(ba

A +ss

ab

aA

2

)21(

+

ss

1- Elements of LEFM

Infinitely sharp tip:

A

Aa

s

ss

,0

2s

s

r +ijs Irwin (1950)

)(2

s ijij fr

K

K=stress intensity factor

)(f2WaaK s

aW

Sample geometry

s (r)

r

rar ss )(

Strong stress gradient

A

1- Elements of LEFM

Mode IIIn-plane, shear,

slidingKII

Mode ITension, opening

Mode IIIOut-of-plane, shear

TearingKI KIII

Mixed mode, to leading order:

)()()(21

s IIIijIII

IIijII

IijIij fKfKfK

r++

1- Elements of LEFM

Griffith’s energy balance criterionElastic energy

'

22

EBaUE

s

Surface energy BaU S 4

Total change in potential energy:SE UUU +D

Propagation at constant applied load: 0DdaUd2a

B

s

strain plane1

'

stress plane'

2

EE

EE

1- Elements of LEFM

Happens for a critical load:lengthCrack constant Material'2

aE

C s

Or for a critical stress intensity factor:

'4 EKK C Fracture toughness

' ;

2

EK

GdAdUG E Energy release rate

)2

M(1 , IfR

ccC V

KKKVKK

1- Elements of LEFM

KII=0

Crack path: principle of local symmetry

1- Elements of LEFM

)1( ,G

VVKK RC

Onset of fracture: 4'

2

EKc

Beyond threshold:

PMMA Glass

22IcI KKV

(E. Sharon & J. Fineberg, Nature 99)

1- Elements of LEFM

Heterogeneities

Rough crack front

Uneven SIFs

Heterogeneous pathSteady crack morphology?Dynamics?

(JP Bouchaud & al, 93J. Schmittbuhl & al, 95D. Bonamy & al, 06)

2- Effect of disorder…


2D 3D

)()( 0 zKKzK III +

))(')'(

)()'(211()( 2

20 fodz

zzzfzfPVKzK II +

+ +

(Meade & Keer 84, Gao & Rice 89)

Stabilizing term


2threshold

2 )()()( zKzKMV II M(f(z),z)

))')'(

)()'((21()( 2

202 dzzz

zfzfPVKzK II

+

))'(),(()',())'(,'())(,(

;0))(,(

)))(,(211()(threshold

zfzfzzzfzzfz

zfz

zfzKzK IcI

))(,()')'(

)()'((2)( 22

20220 zfzKdzzz

zfzfPVKKKtzf

IcIIcI

+

+


tensionLine))(,(),(++

zfzF

ttzf

F

2

2 ),(z

tzf

Edwards-Wilkinson model

)')'(

)()'(( 2 dzzz

zfzfPV 220

IcI KK

Non local elastic restoring force


))(,()')'(

)()'((2)( 22

20220 zfzKdzzz

zfzfPVKKKtzf

IcIIcI

+

+

Depinning transition:• order parameter V• control parameter KI

0(KI

0-KIc)

(KI0-KIc)

V

KI0KIc

~

tzztzf

,

),(

Stable

Propagating


Depinning: line in a periodic potential

f(x=0,t=0)=0

x

f0

)cos( fFFtf

m

F

Pulling forceObstacle force

Obst

acle

forc

ef

f=0

F

1

m

m

FFF

2)( 2fF

dfdtm +

T?

1

2)(

0

0 2 +

f

m fFdfT V (F-Fm)


z2D=0.39 (A. Rosso & W. Krauth & O. Duemmer)

z z+Dz

Df(Dz)

x2/12))()(()(

zzfzzfzf D+DD

Dzzf 2)( zDDD

tt+Dt

ttfttftft

DD+DD 2/12))()(()(

In plane projection of crack front

')'(

)',(),(2

3222

),( 2

000 dz

zzzxhzxhK

xhKKzxK II

IIII +

+

(Movchan, Gao & Willis 98)

Out of plane projection of crack front

X

Z

f(z) ')'(

)()'()(21)()( 2

00 dzzz

zfzfzKPVzKzK III

+ +

zyh(z)


Local symmetry principleKII=0

Crack trajectory

)),(,,(')'(

)'()()2(

3212 20

0

zxhzxdzzz

zhzhKK

xh

I

II

+

+

+

)(.),( /1

xzfxzxh

DD

DDDD

1 if1 if1

)(

uu

uuf

z ≈ 0.4 ≈ 0.5 ≈ z/ ~ 0.8 (Bonamy et al, 06)


f(z)

Out-of-plane

Projection on theyz plane

In-plane

Projection on thexz plane

3- Experiments 3D

P.Daguier et al. (95)

x

z2D ≈ 0.55-06

3- Experiments 3D

Aluminiumalloy

z=0.773nm0.1mm

(M. Hinojosa et al., 98)

Profiles perpendicular to the directionof crack propagation

3- Experiments 3D

z= 0.78from 5nm to

0.5mm

Dz

Profiles perpendicular to the direction of crack propagation

(Dz)

(µm

)

z = 0.77

Z max

(Dz)

(µm

)

Dz (µm)

Aluminum alloy (SEM+Stereo)

)( /1

xzfxh

DD

DD

1 if1 if1

)(

uu

uuf

Dh/D

x

Dz/ Dx1/

3- Experiments 3D

A+

B+ΔxΔz

z = 0.75 = 0.6 = z/ ~ 1.2

xy

z

Dh/D

x

Dz/ Dx1/

Mortar

Quasi-crystal(STM)

h (Å

)

Δh2D(Δz, Δx) = (<(h(zA+Δz, xA+Δx) - h(zA, xA))2>A)1/2

Dz/ Dx1/

Dh/D

x

Exceptions…Sandstone fracture surfaces

log(P(f))

log(f)

z≈0.47

(Boffa et al. 99)

zz P

(Dh)

Dh/(z)z

(Ponson at al. 07)

z≈0.4

3- Experiments 3D

« Model » material : sintered glass beads (Ponson et al, 06)

Porosity 3 to 25%Grain size 50 to 200 mmVitreous grain boundaries

Exceptions…

3- Experiments 3D

ζ=0.4 ± 0.05β=0.5 ± 0.05 =ζ/β=0.8 ±0.05

2 independent

exponents« Universal » structure

function +

Roughness at scales> Grain size

1/

(Ponson et al. 06)

3- Experiments 3D

Rc increases with time

x1

x

S. Morel & al, PRE 2008

Rc(x1)

z=0.75

z=0.4

z=0.79

z=0.4

Rc(x1) Rc(x2)

X2Rc(x2)>Rc (X1)

3- Experiments 3D

Mortar specimens

(K.J. Måløy & al)3- Experiments: interfacial fracture

z(mm)

x(mm)

3- Experiments: interfacial fracture

z2D=0.63 z2D=0.37

100µm

log(

Dh(D

z)/ 0

); 0

=1µm

log(Dz/0); 0=1µm

F 200µm

(S. Santucci et al, EPL 2010)

z

xx

x

<v>=28.1µm/s; a=3.5µm

(K.J. Måløy et al. 06)

Waiting time matrix:t=0 W(z,x)=0t>0 Wt+t(z,x)=1+Wt(z,x)

if front in (z,x)

Front location

Spatial distribution of clusters (white) v(z,x)>10 <v>

ta

xzwxzv

),(1),(


0.39µm/s≤<v>≤40µm/s1.7µm ≤a≤10µm

C=3

Cluster size distribution

Slope -1.6

(K.J. Måløy et al. 06)

(D. Bonamy & al., 08)


(S. Santucci & al., 08)


•Disorder roughnening •Elastic restoring forces rigidity

Undamaged materialTransmission of stresses throughundamaged material :long range interactions (1/r2) very rigid line

Transmission of stressesthrough a « Swiss cheese »: Screening of elastic interactions low rigidity

4- Discussion

Gradient percolation(A. Hansen & J. Schmittbuhl, 03)

Z

X

Damage RFM gradient percolation process

z3D=3D= 2/(1+2)=4/5(RFM/3D=2)

4- Discussion

r « Rc r » Rc

Rc

Damage zonescale

Large scales:elastic domain

z=0.75, =0.6 z=0.4, =0.5

?4- Discussion

3 regions on a fracture surface:1 Linear elastic region z=0.4 =0.5/log2 Intermediate region: within the FPZ

Damage = « perturbation » of the front (screening)z=0.8 =0.6 direction of crack propagation3 Cavity scale: isotropic region

1 2 3

- Size of the FPZ- Direction of crack propagation within FPZ- Damage spreading reconstruction

Fracture of an elastic solid is a dynamic phase transition

4- Discussion

Questions•A model in the PFZ? How to reconcile line model and percolation gradient model ?

•Size of FPZ? Reliable measurements?

•Direct measurement of the disorder correlator

•Dynamics of crack propagation in 3D?

• Radiation damage?

•Breaking liquids…

cuttu ++D ]v)()][(v)([)vt(

Thank you!

2/12

/1

/1

)()(

)()()(

)()()(

x

k

x

k

k

k

x

kk

xhxxh

xhxxhxR

xhxxhxh

D+

D+D

D+DD

k

Gk

k

R

/1

21

2

+

(S. Santucci et al., 07)

R k(D

x)/R

kG

Log10(Dx/0)

PMMAL ≈ 50µm

Dx/0

Dhk(D

x)/R

kG

PMMA≈0.6

3- Statistical characterization of fracture

3.2- Interfacial fracture

(Salminen et al, EPL06)

Peel-in(paper)


Gutenberg-Richter exponent



Omori’s law

Slope -1



vv

tip

Au(111) film(~150 nm)

mica plate

Sample holder

Z-piezo

It

wedge

preamplifier

feedbacksystem of STM PC

Vibration isolation system

Ut

(A. Marchenko et al., 06)



Humid air

n-tetradecane

Humid air Tetradecane



smv

vvvP

O

O

/10

)/exp()(6

9.2)( vvP

Magnitude

10-4 10-2 1 102

Approximate energy radiated (1015J)

104

102

1

103

10Nu

mbe

r of e

arth

quak

es

San Andreas fault

(J. Sethna et al)



AE measurements on mortar (B. Pant, G. Mourot et al., 07)

Energy distribution

Log(E/Emax)

Log(

N(E)

)

P(E)E-1.41

3.3- Fracture of three-dimensional solids


P(E)E-1.49

P(E)E-1.40

AE measurements on polymeric foams (S. Deschanel et al., 06)



Al alloy Ni-platedBS SEM

(E.B. et al., 89)

r/x

C(r)rz

z≈0.8



Profiles perpendicular to the directionof crack propagation



z= 0.78from 5nm to

0.5mmDz


(Dz)

(µm

)

(P. Daguier & al., 96)



Aluminiumalloy

z=0.773nm0.1mm

z = 0.77

Z max

(Dz)

(µm

)

Dz (µm)(M. Hinojosa et al., 98)




(J. Schmittbuhl et al, 95)

Profiles perpendicular to the directionof crack propagation: granite

z≈0.8

z≈0.85



z (µm)direction ofcrack front

x (µm)direction of

crackpropagation

Anisotropy of fracture surfaces

z ~ 0.8

~ 0.6

Direction ofcrack propagation

Direction of crack front

Log(Δx), log(Δz)

Log

(Δh)

L. Ponson, D. Bonamy, E.B. (05)

1 10 102 103

1

10

0.1



Exceptions…Sandstone fracture surfaces

log(P(f))

log(f)

z≈0.47

(Boffa et al. 99)

zz P

(Dh)

Dh/(z)z

(Ponson at al. 07)



« Model » material : sintered glass beads (Coll. H. Auradou, J.-P. Hulin & P. Vié 06)

Porosity 3 to 25%Grain size 50 to 200 mmVitreous grain boundaries

Linear elastic material



Exceptions…

1/zζ=0.4 ± 0.05β=0.5 ± 0.05 z=ζ/β =0.8 ±0.05

2 independent


function +


(Ponson et al. 06)


SummaryCracks and fracture surfaces are self-affine:

-Thin sheets ≈0.6 at scales > L

- Interfacial fracture z’ ≈0.6 at scales < L

- 3D solid out-of-plane perpendicular to crack propagation z≈0.75 (5 decades!)

- Out-of-plane parallel to the direction of crack propagation ≈0.6

- In-plane z’ ≈0.6


f(z)

Out-of-plane

Projection on theyz plane

In-plane

Projection on thexz plane

3.3- Fracture of 3D specimens


P.Daguier et al. (95)

x

z’≈0.55-06



Out-of-plane roughness measurements

Polishing



Al alloy Ni-platedBS SEM

(E.B. et al., 89)

r/x

C(r)rz

z≈0.8



(J. Schmittbuhl et al, 95)

Profiles perpendicular to the direction of crack propagation: granite

z≈0.8

z≈0.85



z (µm)direction ofcrack front

x (µm)direction of

crackpropagation

Anisotropy of fracture surfaces

z ~ 0.8

~ 0.6

Direction ofcrack propagation

Direction of crack front

Log(Δx), log(Δz)

Log

(Δh)

L. Ponson, D. Bonamy, E.B. (05)

1 10 102 103

1

10

0.1



Béton(Profilométrie)

Glass (AFM)

Alliage métallique (SEM+Stéréoscopie)

Quasi-cristaux (STM)

130mm


Dh (n

m)

Dz (nm)

A B

ΔxΔz

L. Ponson et al, PRL 2006L. Ponson et al, IJF 2006

Dh/D

x

Dz/ Dx1/ z

)(. /1

xzfxh

DD

DD

1 si1 si1

)(

uu

uuf

z = 0.75 = 0.6Z= z/ ~ 1.2

z


Glass (AFM)

Alliage métallique (SEM+Stéréoscopie)

Quasi-crystals(STM)


A B

ΔxΔz 130mm

Quasi-crystalsCourtesy P. Ebert

Coll. D.B., L.P., L. Barbier, P. Ebert

z

z

)(. /1

xzfxh

DD

DD

1 si1 si1

)(

uu

uuf

z = 0.75 = 0.6

z = z/ ~ 1.2

h (Å

)4- Statistical characterization of fracture


Glass (AFM)


Quasi-crystals (STM)


A B

ΔxΔz 130mm

)(. /1

xzfxh

DD

DD

1 si1 si1

)(

uu

uuf

z = 0.75 = 0.6

z = z/ ~ 1.2

Dh/D

x

Dz/ Dx1/z

h (Å

)



Mortar(Profilometry)

Glass (AFM)


Quasi-crystals(STM)


A B

ΔxΔz 130mm

)(. /1

xzfxh

DD

DD

1 si1 si1

)(

uu

uuf

z = 0.75 = 0.6

z= z/ ~ 1.2

Dh/D

x

Dz/ Dx1/z

Mortar

(Coll. S. Morel & G. Mourot)h

(Å)


Mortar(Profilometry)

Glass (AFM)

Metallic alloy (SEM+Stereo)

Quasi-crystals(STM)

A B

ΔxΔz 130mm

Dz/ Dx1/z(lz/lx)1/z(Dz/lz)/(Dx/lx)1/z

Dh/D

x(D

h/l x)

/(Dx/

l x)

Universal structure functionVery different length scalesh

(Å)

Coll. D.B.,L.P.,L. Barbier,P. Ebert


Expo

nent

1mm

Preliminary results(G. Pallarès, B. Nowakowski et al., 08)


Exceptions…

Sandstone fracture surfaceslog(P(f))

log(f)

z≈0.47

(Boffa et al. 99)

zz P

(Dh)

Dh/(z)z

(Ponson at al. 07)

ζ=0.4 ± 0.05β=0.5 ± 0.05 z=ζ/β=0.8 ±0.05

2 independent


function +


1/z

(Ponson et al. 06)


1D crack in a 2D sample

4.1- Random Fuse Models

L. De Arcanglis et al, 1985

4- Stochastic models of failure

2/1

1

2)(1)(

L

x

yxyL

Lw

(E. Hinrichsen et al. 91)

≈0.7=2/3 ?



(P.Nukala et al. 05)

(P.Nukala et al. 06)(G. Batrouni & A. Hansen, 98)

z==0.52

Minimum energy surface z≈0.41(A. Middleton, 95

Hansen & Roux, 91)

z≈0.5

Fracture surface=juxtapositionof rough damage cavities

(Metallic glass, E.B. et al, 08)


s-2.55

P(E)E-1.8

Esa, a≈1.3

Avalanche size distribution (S. Zapperi et al.05)



Effect of disorder on the fracture of materials

Documents

effect of disorder fzout

effect of heterogeneities

stablepropagating2 effect

effect of disorder2

effect of disorderz2d

crack trajectory

plane projection of

elements of lefmhappens