Size Effect on Structural Strength

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the Size Effect on Structural Strength, specifically differentiating between Statistical and Energetic size effects as outlined in the Wikipedia article. The Statistical size effect indicates that larger objects exhibit weaker points due to material strength variation. The Energetic size effect is divided into two types: the first relates to bending beams with microcracks, suggesting that larger beams require greater maximum stress to maintain internal moments; the second type addresses the scaling of significant cracks, indicating that larger cracks fail at lower stress levels, akin to Griffith's Criterion. The conversation also references Bazant's law and Irwin's equation, emphasizing their relevance to ductile materials.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Statistical and Energetic size effects
  • Familiarity with Griffith's Criterion and its application to material failure
  • Knowledge of Bazant's law and its relation to Irwin's equation
  • Basic principles of structural mechanics, particularly bending and uniaxial tension
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the derivation and implications of Griffith's Criterion in detail
  • Study Bazant's law and its applications in structural engineering
  • Explore the effects of microcracks on material strength in bending beams
  • Investigate the relationship between surface energy and elastic energy in crack propagation
USEFUL FOR

Structural engineers, materials scientists, and researchers focused on the mechanics of materials and structural integrity will benefit from this discussion.

person123
Messages
326
Reaction score
52
TL;DR
I want to check if my intuition behind the size effect is generally correct, even if I don't fully understand the derivation.
I'm using the wikipedia page on Size Effect to get an understanding of it. It identifies Statistical and Energetic size effects and two types within energetic.

I believe I understand statistical, as it seems to essentially say that assuming there's some variation in the material strength, the larger the object, the weaker the weakest points, decreasing the overall strength.

I'm a bit less sure on the first type for energetic size effect. It takes a beam undergoing bending, with a weaker region on the side undergoing tension due to microcracks. I think it argues that because that region can take on less stress, in order to provide the same internal moment, there must be a greater max stress. However, the derivation doesn't seem to make sense to me (I could go into more detail on that), and I was also wondering if it only applies for the specific situation of a bending beam with microcracks at the tensile region.

The second type seems to apply when a significant crack has already formed. I think it's arguing that as the beam is scaled up, the cracks scales as well. By understanding the relation between the change in surface energy and elastic energy you can show that a larger crack will fail at a lower stress. This seems essentially equivalent to the derivation of Griffith's Criterion. Are there significant differences, and would this also apply to a beam just undergoing uniaxial tension for example?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
person123 said:
I'm a bit less sure on the first type for energetic size effect. It takes a beam undergoing bending, with a weaker region on the side undergoing tension due to microcracks. I think it argues that because that region can take on less stress, in order to provide the same internal moment, there must be a greater max stress. However, the derivation doesn't seem to make sense to me (I could go into more detail on that), and I was also wondering if it only applies for the specific situation of a bending beam with microcracks at the tensile region.
Same consideration (of finite thickness of damage zone) is applicable for compression too. For example, cracks initiate in ring-shaped zone around entry point of rod forced into concrete, not only on rod surface.
person123 said:
The second type seems to apply when a significant crack has already formed. I think it's arguing that as the beam is scaled up, the cracks scales as well. By understanding the relation between the change in surface energy and elastic energy you can show that a larger crack will fail at a lower stress. This seems essentially equivalent to the derivation of Griffith's Criterion. Are there significant differences, and would this also apply to a beam just undergoing uniaxial tension for example?
That chapter of wikipedia article "size effect" is based on Bazant's law, which is extension of Irwin`'s equation for ductile materials which is derived from Griffith`s equation. The Griffith's equation itself is applicable only for brittle materials.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lnewqban

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K