Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:58:20.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Fracture toughness of Cu and Ni single crystals with a nanocrack

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2015

Cheng Bin Cui
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Inha University, Incheon 402-751, Republic of Korea
Seon Do Kim
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Inha University, Incheon 402-751, Republic of Korea
Hyeon Gyu Beom*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Inha University, Incheon 402-751, Republic of Korea
*
a)Address all correspondence to this author. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The fracture toughness values of nanosized Cu and Ni single crystals with an edge nanocrack were determined under quasi-static loading conditions. Molecular statics (MS) simulations that can essentially capture the discreteness and the nonlinearity of materials were used in the present study. Different crack lengths were used to evaluate the effects of crack size on the fracture toughness. Based on MS simulations, the energy release rate was calculated using the energies obtained from two models with neighboring crack lengths under the same loading conditions. Furthermore, continuum counterparts of the atomistic models were used to calculate the toughness by the finite element method for linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM). The reasons behind the discrepancies between the toughness values obtained using different methods were discussed, and the applicable ranges of the toughness and the LEFM were indicated in terms of the lattice constants.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Wang, Y., Chen, M., Zhou, F., and Ma, E.: High tensile ductility in a nanostructured metal. Nature 419, 912 (2002).Google Scholar
Meyers, M.A., Mishra, A., and Benson, D.J.: Mechanical properties of nanocrystalline materials. Prog. Mater. Sci. 51, 427 (2006).Google Scholar
Gumbsch, P.: An atomistic study of brittle fracture: Toward explicit failure criteria from atomistic modeling. J. Mater. Res. 10, 2897 (1995).Google Scholar
Xu, Y.G., Behdinan, K., and Fawaz, Z.: Molecular dynamics calculation of the J-integral fracture criterion for nano-sized crystals. Int. J. Fract. 130, 571 (2004).Google Scholar
Karimi, M., Roarty, T., and Kaplan, T.: Molecular dynamics simulations of crack propagation in Ni with defects. Modell. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 14, 1409 (2006).Google Scholar
Guo, Y. and Wang, C.: Atomistic study of lattice trapping behavior for brittle fracture in bcc-iron. Comput. Mater. Sci. 40, 376 (2007).Google Scholar
Krull, H. and Yuan, H.: Suggestions to the cohesive traction–separation law from atomistic simulations. Eng. Fract. Mech. 78, 525 (2011).Google Scholar
Petucci, J., LeBlond, C., and Karimi, M.: Molecular dynamics simulations of brittle fracture in fcc crystalline materials in the presence of defects. Comput. Mater. Sci. 86, 130 (2014).Google Scholar
Mattoni, A., Colombo, L., and Cleri, F.: Atomic scale origin of crack resistance in brittle fracture. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 115501 (2005).Google Scholar
Zhang, S., Zhu, T., and Belytschko, T.: Atomistic and multiscale analyses of brittle fracture in crystal lattices. Phys. Rev. B 76, 094114 (2007).Google Scholar
Adnan, A. and Sun, C.T.: Evolution of nanoscale defects to planar cracks in a brittle solid. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 58, 983 (2010).Google Scholar
Cui, C.B. and Beom, H.G.: Molecular dynamics simulations of edge cracks in copper and aluminum single crystals. Mater. Sci. Eng., A 609, 102 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plimpton, S.: Fast parallel algorithms for short–range molecular dynamics. J. Comput. Phys. 117, 1 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daw, M.S. and Baskes, M.I.: Semiempirical, quantum mechanical calculation of hydrogen embrittlement in metals. Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1285 (1983).Google Scholar
Mishin, Y., Mehl, M., Papaconstantopoulos, D.A., Voter, A.F., and Kress, J.D.: Structural stability and lattice defects in copper: Ab initio, tight-binding, and embedded-atom calculations. Phys. Rev. B 63, 224106 (2001).Google Scholar
Mishin, Y., Farkas, D., Mehl, M.J., and Papaconstantopoulos, D.A.: Interatomic potentials for monoatomic metals from experimental data and ab initio calculations. Phys. Rev. B 59, 3393 (1999).Google Scholar
Swenson, R.J.: Comments on virial theorems for bounded systems. Am. J. Phys. 51, 940 (1983).Google Scholar
Subramaniyan, A.K. and Sun, C.T.: Continuum interpretation of virial stress in molecular simulations. Int. J. Solids Struct. 45, 4340 (2008).Google Scholar
Anderson, T.L.: Fracture Mechanics: Fundamental and Application, 3rd ed. (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2005).Google Scholar
Rice, J.R.: A path independent integral and the approximate analysis of strain concentration by notches and cracks. J. Appl. Mech. 35, 379 (1968).Google Scholar
Tada, H., Paris, P.C., and Irwin, G.R.: The Stress Analysis of Cracks Handbook, 3rd ed. (ASME Press, New York, 2000).Google Scholar
Suo, Z.: Singularities, interfaces and cracks in dissimilar anisotropic media. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 427, 331 (1990).Google Scholar
Shih, C.F., Moran, B., and Nakamura, T.: Energy release rate along a three-dimensional crack front in a thermally stressed body. Int. J Fract. 30, 79 (1986).Google Scholar
Li, J.: AtomEye: An efficient atomistic configuration viewer. Modell. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 11, 173 (2003).Google Scholar
Huang, S., Zhang, S., Belytschko, T., Terdalkar, S.S., and Zhu, T.: Mechanics of nanocrack: Fracture, dislocation emission, and amorphization. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 57, 840 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, R., Hsieh, C., and Rana, V.: Lattice trapping of fracture cracks. J. Appl. Phys. 42, 3154 (1971).Google Scholar