difference the conver paper, the a required Figure 2. C increments Fig. 3 show 6 with the is always accumulati Figure 3. Pr (b) specime Fig. 4 dep mechanics to the expe 2~3 times coefficient tests of CT between pr rgence of th maximum c accuracy of Comparison ws the predi initial semi more cons ive increme redicted cree en 6 picts the tes approach f erimental re as long as t and expon T specimen redictions i he relation crack growt f crack grow 0 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 Crack depth, mm of crack de icted creep i-elliptical c siderable th ent of crack (a) ep crack shap sted specim for specimen esults for b s the actual nent, C and s instead of s extraordin between th th incremen wth time. 1000 2000 a max t /300 t /150 t /75 t /30 t /15 epth variatio crack shape crack front. han that al depth is ob pe evolutions men photos ns 5 and 6. oth specime l test durat q, in Eq. (2 f the invest 6 narily hard he crack dep nt is selecte 3000 4000 Time, h ons predicted e developm It can be fo long surfac bviously larg s resulting fro taken from It can be sa ens. Nevert tions. This 2) are obtai tigated thum 1 to identify pth and pro d as t/150, 0 5000 600 t d using five ents for thu ound that th ce direction ger than tha om fracture m m Ref [9, 15 aid that the theless, the is mainly b ined from th mbnail crac 3th Internation June 1 on the plo opagation ti which is sm 00 7000 =15mm Spec.5 e different m umbnail crac e increment n at each s at of half cra (b) mechanics ap 5] and pred predicted c predicted p because tha he correlatio k specimen nal Conferenc 16–21, 2013, ot, which de ime does ex mall enough maximum cr cks in speci t along dep step. As a ack length. pproach: (a) dictions usi crack fronts propagation at creep cra on of da/dt ns. For a giv ce on Fracture Beijing, China emonstrates xist. In this h to achieve rack growth mens 5 and th direction result, the specimen 5; ing fracture are similar ns times are ack growth and C* for ven C*, the e a s s e h d n e ; e r e h r e
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjM0NDE=