Comparison of U.S. and Russian Slow Crack Growth Data and Models
Both the US and Russian space programs use similar predictive models for design of fused silica windows on the International space station. The Russian model can be derived from the power expression for slow crack growth (SCG) or “static fatigue.” The US uses both power and exponential models. Despite the similarity of models and data fitting approach (linear regression and right censoring), different SCG parameters have been derived by US and Russian parties for the same material (Russian fused silica) tested in a similar manner. The difference appears to be related to the use of short-term strength data along with the longer-term static fatigue data, with the power law parameter n being very sensitive to the conversion of strength data into equivalent static data. This hybrid approach is feasible if strength data is measured with a constant stress rate and is appropriately converted to a static equivalent. More research into the approach is needed. However, because of the nonlinear behavior of fused silica in log(v) – log(K(I) ) space and the sensitivity of parameter estimation to fit range, the exponential model is a better choice regardless of test method. Functions are given to convert parameters from the Russian model to those in the US model. However, accurate conversion is hampered by the lack of inert strength data. When the same test technique is used, US and Russian materials exhibit very similar parameters.