Crack growth behavior of 7075-T6 under biaxial tension–tension fatigue |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Key Laboratory of High Performance Ship Technology of Ministry of Education, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430063, China;2. Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G40LZ, United Kingdom;1. Department of Marine Systems Engineering, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan;2. Maintenance Research Technology Group, National Maritime Research Institute, 6-38-1 Shinkawa, Mitaka, Tokyo 181-0004, Japan;3. Structural Analysis and Processing Research Group, National Maritime Research Institute, 6-38-1 Shinkawa, Mitaka, Tokyo 181-0004, Japan;1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Avda. de la Universidad 30, 28911 Leganés, Madrid, Spain;2. State Key Laboratory of Nonlinear Mechanics (LNM), Institute of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China;3. Centre of Research in Mechanical Engineering – CIIM, Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera, 46022 Valencia, Spain;1. LMS, Ecole Polytechnique, Université Paris-Saclay, UMR CNRS 7649, Palaiseau, France;2. IFP Energies Nouvelles, 1-4 avenue de Bois-Préau, 92852 Rueil-Malmaison, France |
| |
| Abstract: | Crack growth behavior of aluminum alloy 7075-T6 was investigated under in-plane biaxial tension–tension fatigue with stress ratio of 0.5. Two biaxiality ratios, λ (=1 and 1.5) were used. Cruciform specimens with a center hole, having a notch at 45° to the specimen’s arms, were tested in a biaxial fatigue test machine. Crack initiated and propagated coplanar with the notch for λ = 1 in L–T orientation, while it was non-coplanar for λ = 1.5 between L–T and T–L orientations. Uniaxial fatigue crack growth tests in L–T and T–L orientations were also conducted. Crack growth rate in region II was practically the same for biaxial fatigue with λ = 1 in L–T orientation and for the uniaxial fatigue in L–T or T–L orientations, while it was faster for biaxial fatigue with λ = 1.5 at a given crack driving force. However, fatigue damage mechanisms were quite different in each case. In region I, crack driving force at a given crack growth rate was smallest for biaxial fatigue with λ = 1.5 and for uniaxial fatigue in T–L orientation, followed by biaxial fatigue with λ = 1 and uniaxial fatigue in L–T orientation in ascending order at a given crack growth rate. |
| |
| Keywords: | Biaxial fatigue Mixed mode Crack growth rate Aluminum alloys Crack path |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
