Abstract
Crack closure at positive stress levels [i] is currently being investigated as a mechanism to explain variations in fatigue crack growth rate caused by changes in the testing conditions. Compliance [i-3], resistivity [4-6], optical [7,8], and acoustical [9,10] measurements, extensively used to monitor crack growth, yield information about crack closure. Correlation between the various results is quite difficult, however, since different monitoring techniques, sample geometries, materials, etc. have been involved. In the present investigation two of the above crack monitoring techniques are used on two different sample geometries, PTC [I0] and CT [ii], and two heats of A1 2219-T851, but otherwise equal testing conditions, to characterize closure more fully.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
