Unraveling the myth of closure corrections

Sharpening the definition of opening and closure stresses with an energy approach

Journal article (2021)

Authors

J.J.A. van Kuijk Structural Integrity & Composites - Aerospace Engineering
R.C. Alderliesten Structural Integrity & Composites - Aerospace Engineering
R. Benedictus Structural Integrity & Composites - Aerospace Engineering
Research Group
Structural Integrity & Composites (Aerospace Engineering) (TU Delft)
Copyright: © 2021 J.J.A. van Kuijk, R.C. Alderliesten, R. Benedictus
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.106016
More Info
expand_more

Published Date

2021

Language

English

Faculty

Aerospace Engineering

Department

Aerospace Structures & Materials

Research Group

Structural Integrity & Composites

Abstract

The substantiation of fatigue crack closure corrections is disputed, based on the closure stress definition. The ΔKeff equation lacks a physical explanation. An inconsistency is observed between the opening stress Sopphen as used by this equation and the physical opening stress Sopphys. This Sopphys is related to Sopphen through an energy equivalent area approach. Furthermore, an elastic spring model is used as a physical approach to crack closure effects. An FEA approach generates Sopphys values, which are reworked into Sopphen. This physical model agrees well with existing closure corrections, and is able to provide a physical explanation for their necessity.