The objective of this paper is to develop further a framework for computationally modeling microstructurally small fatigue crack growth in AA 7075-T651 (Bozek et al 2008 Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. 16 065007). The focus is on the nucleation event, when a crack extends from within a second-phase particle into a surrounding grain, since this has been observed to be an initiating mechanism for fatigue crack growth in this alloy. It is hypothesized that nucleation can be predicted by computing a non-local nucleation metric near the crack front. The hypothesis is tested by employing a combination of experimentation and finite element modeling in which various slip-based and energy-based nucleation metrics are tested for validity, where each metric is derived from a continuum crystal plasticity formulation. To investigate each metric, a non-local procedure is developed for the calculation of nucleation metrics in the neighborhood of a crack front. Initially, an idealized baseline model consisting of a single grain containing a semi-ellipsoidal surface particle is studied to investigate the dependence of each nucleation metric on lattice orientation, number of load cycles and non-local regularization method. This is followed by a comparison of experimental observations and computational results for microstructural models constructed by replicating the observed microstructural geometry near second-phase particles in fatigue specimens. It is found that orientation strongly influences the direction of slip localization and, as a result, influences the nucleation mechanism. Also, the baseline models, replication models and past experimental observation consistently suggest that a set of particular grain orientations is most likely to nucleate fatigue cracks. It is found that a continuum crystal plasticity model and a non-local nucleation metric can be used to predict the nucleation event in AA 7075-T651. However, nucleation metric threshold values that correspond to various nucleation governing mechanisms must be calibrated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hochhalter et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: