to be expected for slant crack growth,4 as confirmed by the Ritchie, Smith, and Knott tests. Buckling involves out-of-plane deformations, but these should not be confused with those caused by throughthickness yielding associated with plane-stress conditions at a crack tip. When pronounced, buckling in very thin sheets can reduce strength through an increase in K I due to the inflexion which appears at a crack tip,5 not by the appearance of Mode III .deformations; in this case slant growth is Mode I, by the small-scale argument. Buckling would not normally be expected in 'thin' specimens of the type used by Ritchie, Smith, and Knott, but if it did occur it would obviously cause a particular 45 plane to be favoured. Observation of fracture surfaces shows6 that the transition to slant crack growth takes place by the development of shear lips (Fig. 1), which increase in width until they reach a maximum size or, in 'thin' specimens, they meet, completing the transition. (Tunnelling of the crack in the centre of the specimen while the transition is taking place is more likely to be the result of the complex three-dimensional stress system in the transition region than evidence that square crack growth is faster.) The length of this transition zone of mixed square and slant fracture depends on precise loading conditions.6 The problem of what causes slant growth therefore reduces to finding the conditions for a shear lip to develop. The appearance of shear lips in thick specimens rules out buckling as a cause. Shear lips appear on both sides of a specimen at about the same time, so their appearance must be due to the satisfaction of some condition. In thick specimens shear lips appear randomly on parallel and perpendicular planes (Fig. 1), whereas in thin specimens they usually, but not invariably,6 appear on parallel planes. Material textures which suppress through-thickness yielding also suppress shear lips,' as can changes in work-hardening behaviour.! Slant crack growth only Qccurs in those materials in which the static tensile fracture of a piece of the same material of the same thickness also occurs on a 450 through-the-thickness plane.6 RITCHIE, SMITH, and KNOTT have recently published! some data on the fatigue crack growth properties of mild steel. Loading conditions were such that medium rates of crack growth (5 x 10-6 to 5 X 10-4 mm/cycle) were obtained. This is above the region of the threshold for fatigue-crack growth, but below the region where gross plasticity effects are likely. Data were analysed in terms of !:::.K I, the range of opening mode stress-intensity factor K I, in a fatigue cycle. As would be expected, results f~r thick (13, 15, 20, and 48 mm) singleedge-notched (SEN) specimens tested in pure bending agreed reasonably well with results for 20 mm thick SEN specimens tested in tension. The relatively minor inconsistencies observed were probably rightly attributed to shortcomings in the use of !:::.K I in the analysis. An interesting feature of the results for thin specimens is that for 2 mm SEN bend specimens the crack -growth rates were about half those for thick specimens, with 'square' growth on a 90 plane, whereas for 1 and 2 mm SEN tension specimens the crack -growth rates were about twice those for thick specimens with 'slant' growth on a 45 plane through the specimen thickness. Possible reasons for these differences were discussed in general terms, but some further clarification of the fracture mechanics involved is desirable; various factors involved -are therefore briefly _reviewed and discussed.