4 Se outa Vl 1p 15:86 es sO (OP LH ein Got in THERMODYNAMICS AND THE GRIFFITH CRITERION FOR BRITTLE FRACTURE ‘Morton E, Gury Department of Mathematics, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, US.A, (Received 9 June 1978: in resised form 3 November 197) Abstract—The Grifith criterion for fracture, considered within the framework of nonlinear thermoeast city, is shown (0 be a necessary condition for crack initiation, provided the underying stain energy is propery interpreted, and provided the initial temperature is continuous atthe crack tp NOTATION Lightfae letters indicate scalars; boldface lower case letters indicate vectors (in >; boldface uppercase eters indicate tensors (linear transformations of 2 into #3). AT isthe transpose of A and A:B™ AyBy, Here we have used Standard indcial notation and Cartesian coordinates. Finally, div Sis the vector feld wth components 3,2 while Vis the tensor Feld with components 24/35, 1. INTRODUCTION for fracture asserts that a crack propagates when the rate of decrease of strain energy with increased crack length is batanced by the concomitant increase in energy due to the formation of new crack surface.t Since this assertion is energetic in nature, it seems reasonable to expect at least a partial justification of the criterion within the framework of thermodynamics.t Such a partial justification is the main result of the present paper. In particular, we show that the Griffith criterion is, in a certain sense, necessary for crack initiation in an elastic body. Although we allow the temperature to vary with position and time, interestingly, the underlying strain energy turns out to be the free energy computed holding the temperature at its intial value. Crucial to our analysis is the requirement that the temperature be continuous at the crack tip. Thus the above result will generally be inapplicable to situations in which, ¢.g. local plast flow at the tip manifests itself, there, in a point source of heat and corresponding unbounded temperatures (See Ref. [6)) To focus attention on the thermodynamics of crack propagation, we attempt to avoid geometrical and notational complications by limiting our discussion to edge cracks in two- dimensional bodies. The extension to more general types of cracks in two or three dimensions is not particularly difficult. Finally, while we do not rule out finite deformations, we do confine ‘our attention to quasi-static behavior. 2. THE FIRST TWO LAWS FOR A REGULAR BODY To fix notation we consider first a two-dimensional regular body @, which we identify with the regular region of * it occupies in a fixed reference configuration. The first two laws for # take the form§ Quy where » is the outward unit normal to the boundary a@ of @. Here ‘At eas under fied grip condition in which the power expended onthe body vanishes. Other investigations involving the thermodynamics of facture are Refs, [2-S}. ‘Note that we have restricted our atention to quasi-static processes, since we have neglected the rate of change of ‘Kinetic energy in (21), Further, in writing 2.1) we have tacitly assumed that body forces and radiant heating are absent 383ss M. E, Guay ‘u(x, ) is the displacement of the material point x (in #) at time t: ‘Sx, 1) is the (Piola-Kirchhoff) stress: (x, £) is the internal energy: ‘n(x, 1) is the entropy: Gs, 1) is the heat ux: (x, 1)>0 is the temperature: ‘Gx, £)20 is the entropy production. Of course, (2.1) are valid not only for , but for any regular subregion of @, and this fact, with the equation of equilibrium divs=0, 22) vyields the balance equations divq+S- Va, 23) div (q/6) +. We restrict our attention to homogeneoust elastic materials: i.e. to materials defined by ‘smooth constitutive equations of the form 4) with We define the free energy by = GH, 0) = e(H, 6)~ O9(H, 6); 5) then, as is well known, compatibility with thermodynamics requires that§ (2.6) 3, PRELIMINARY DEFINITIONS ‘We assume that # contains an edge crack of negligible thickness. The crack is modeled as a ‘smooth non-intersecting curve 2(s) parametrized by arc length s, 0s 5 < ¢(t); 5 = 0 corresponds to the intersection of the crack with the regular boundary 2@ of @; s = ¢(t) labels the crack tip, which is allowed to advance smoothly with time. For convenience we write €)= (63): 055 = ett) ‘All of our results are valid for inhomogeneous materi We use the term “smooth” asa synonym for "CP" 4c Ref. [7]; bere a4/3H is the tensor with components aff, ‘That i, the boundary @ would have were it not cracked‘Thermodynamics andthe Grfith criterion fr brite fracture 585 for the set of points comprising the crack, = 460) for the position of the tip, and d MO= ae for the velocity of propagation of the tip. Since s measures arc length, |dz/ds|= 1 and |v| = é. We denote by ms) a continuous unit vector field normal to the crack. The fields o(x, 1) of interest will be defined at each x in @-€(1) and each ¢ in some time interval (0,1). A field ¢ of this type is a C* fracture field (see Ref. [8)), (n > 0 an integer) if: @ the derivatives of g of order 0 such that 0(x,0)—> 6; whenever x tends to the tip from # ~ €(0). (Ta Att=0, (42) ) ds a, Proof. By (3.8), (T2), (3.2) (with Ji,lnlas and f la-alas remain bounded as 80. Assumption (T;) is quite strong, since it most likely rules out the possibility of a heat source at the crack tip. Thus the present theory is most probably not a valid model for situations in which dissipative mechanisms, such as local plastic flow at the crack tip, are not negligible. negligible. ‘The number (0) ~ rN (0) 43) represents the initial rate at which free energy is absorbed by the tip. Assumptions (T;) and (T.) allow us to establish a counterpart of (4.2) for Wo.‘Thermodynamics and the Grifith criterion fr brite fractre 39 Theorem. As 5-0, [fe +80-w04e] ~y (44) Proof. First of all, (73) implies that Sup (x, 0) Br]+0 as 50. Thus we may conclude from (Ts) that at ¢ = 0, If (6 o,)nnde| = suplo~ orl f [nl de0. a ha, * hy A similar argument shows that at 4.6) If we multiply (4.2), at ¢=0 by 6, and subtract the result from (4.2), evaluated at the same time, and use (2.5), (4.3), (4.5) and (4.6), we arrive at (4.4). Remark. It is important to note that—in contrast to (4.2)—the result (4.4) does not involve the heat flux q. Further, it is clear that if we were to require that (7s) and (T¢) be satisfied for all (with 6; = 6r(0), then (4.4) (with Yo= Ya(t)) would also hold for allt. 5. THE GRIFFITH CONDITION ‘We are now in a position to establish our main result—the necessity of the Griffith condition. To state this result concisely, we write Golx) = (x, 0) for the initial temperature field, and p= sy-aat] 5.) Ps 0 for the initial power expended on the body by the environment. We also use the abbreviation J, devw, 00 4a [devas 1, 00) da, 62) for the free energy the body would have at time ¢ if the temperature were independent of time and equal to @4(t). Of course, (5.2) is not the actual free energy, since (x, ), for 1>0, will generally be unequal to 6(x). To insure that (5.2) has meaning, we assume that (7) §(Vu, 6) is a regular fracture density. Theorem (Griffith criterion). A necessary condition for crack propagation is that [Sf dorm, coda] + v= Po 63) Proof. By (3.7) (with q replaced by 87a) and (3.10), tin f$-Vada= fS»-adt—tim {| s-ads 64)ct) ME Gum Next, by (2.6), (UVa, 69))" = (Vu, 86) - Va. ‘Thus if we apply the transport theorem (3.11) with € replaced by 9(Vu, 0), we arrive at df, . Gif, 00. oda= f Se, 4) Pada [ate a 63) Note that at ¢ = 0, (Vu, 6) is the initial stress and (Vu, 6) is the initial free energy. Thus (5.1), (5.4) and (5.5) imply thatt ting; f, He, 90da) = Pe-tin[ [don rsa evan But by (75) and (3.2) (with @ = (Vu, 6), lim 3 i Gru, 49 da= 2. dou. 09 da, and we therefore conclude, with the aid of (4.4), that (5.3) holds. This completes the proof. ‘The last theorem is interesting: it asserts that the Griffith condition necessarily holds, at least for crack initiation, provided the underlying strain energy is the free energy of the body with the temperature held fixed at Gg(x) = (x, 0). Remark. It is important to note when one is modeling situations in which entropy is produced at the tip, will not represent a rate of increase of tip entropy. Indeed, in this instance W=N,~-I, where ¥,(t) is the rate of increase of tip entropy and T'(t)=0 is the entropy production at the tip, Here it is more natural to define Ye = 8(0)~ brf(0), in which case Yo in (5.3) should be replaced by Yo + 110). Of course, the assumption (Ts) would probably preclude a production of entropy at the tip. ‘Here the limits follow evaluation at ¢=0. The limit involving ¥ on the right sie exists because all of the other Limits exist ‘Acknowledgements—The author is grateful to D. Reynolds, J. Rice, W. Walker and C. Yatomi for valuable discussions. ‘This work was supported by the Ait Force Office of Scientie Research REFERENCES. ‘A.A. Gaifith, The phenomenon of rupture and How in sls. Pil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. 214, 163-198 192). G.P. Cherepanov, Crack propagation ia continuous medi. J. Appl. Math. Mech. 31, 03-S12 (967). H.C. Strifors, A generalized force measure of conditions at crack tps. Int. J Solids Structures 10, 1389-1406 (1974). J. Eftis and Hi. Liebowitz, On surface energy and the continuum theraodyeamics of brite fracture. Engng Fact. Mech 8, 458-485 (1976). 5. 1.R Rice, Thermodynamics of the quasistatic growth of Grfith cracks J, Mech. Phys. Solids 26, 61-78 (978). 61. R Rice and N. Levy, Local heating by plastic deformation at a crack tp. Physics of Strength and Plasticity, pp. 271-283. MIT Press, Cambridge (155). quasi-static elastic crack propagation, J. Hlgst. Tobe published (1978). classical field theories. Handbuch der Physik II. Springer Vein, Berlin (1960)