NASA-Langley Research Center's participation in a round-robin comparison between some current crack-propagation prediction methods
A round-robin study was conducted which evaluated and compared different methods currently in practice for predicting crack growth in surface-cracked specimens. This report describes the prediction methods used by the Fracture Mechanics Engineering Section, at NASA-Langley Research Center, and presents a comparison between predicted crack growth and crack growth observed in laboratory experiments. For tests at higher stress levels, the correlation between predicted and experimentally determined crack growth was generally quite good. For tests at lower stress levels, the predicted number of cycles to reach a given crack length was consistently higher than the experimentally determined number of cycles. This consistent overestimation of the number of cycles could have resulted from a lack of definition of crack-growth data at low values of the stress intensity range. Generally, the predicted critical flaw sizes were smaller than the experimentally determined critical flaw sizes. This underestimation probably resulted from using plane-strain fracture toughness values to predict failure rather than the more appropriate values based on maximum load.