Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical

Engineers, Part L: Journal of Materials

Designhttp://pil.sagepub.com/
and Applications

Effects of particle size, particle volume fraction and matrix composition on the fatigue crack
growth resistance of Al alloy/Al alloy + SiC p bimaterials

M T Milan and P Bowen

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part L: Journal of Materials Design and Applications 2002
216: 245
DOI: 10.1177/146442070221600404
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://pil.sagepub.com/content/216/4/245

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Institution of Mechanical Engineers

Additional services and information for Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part L: Journal of Materials
Design and Applications can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://pil.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://pil.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://pil.sagepub.com/content/216/4/245.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Oct 1, 2002

What is This?

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

245

Effects of particle size, particle volume fraction and

matrix composition on the fatigue crack growth
resistance of Al alloy/Al alloy SiCp bimaterials
M T Milan and P Bowen*
School of Metallurgy and Materials, IRCInterdisciplinary Research Centre, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston,
Birmingham, UK

Abstract: The fatigue crack growth resistance of Al alloy/Al alloy SiCp bimaterials for crack growth
perpendicular to the interface is affected by thermal residual stresses, elastic mismatch, plastic mismatch and
direction of crack approach to the interface. When the crack approaches the interface from the composite
side, the crack growth resistance is mainly controlled by the compressive residual stress near to the interface.
Conversely, when the crack grows from the aluminium side towards the composite, the crack is shielded
primarily by the elastic/plastic mismatch. In this work, the effects of particle size, particle volume fraction
and matrix composition on the fatigue crack growth resistance of Al alloy/Al alloy SiCp bimaterials have
been assessed. These parameters can affect both the thermal residual stress pro
le and the elastic/plastic
mismatch, and hence the effective crack tip driving force for crack extension is also affected.
Keywords: fatigue crack growth, bimaterial, elastic mismatch, plastic mismatch, residual stress

NOTATION
da=dN
E
K
Kmax
Kmin
Kr
R
R0
t

fatigue crack growth rate

Youngs modulus
applied stress intensity factor
applied maximum stress intensity factor
applied minimum stress intensity factor
thermal residual stress intensity factor
applied stress ratio
effective stress ratio
thickness

a
DK
DKint

linear thermal expansion coef
cient

applied stress intensity factor range
applied stress intensity factor range close to
the interface
residual stress perpendicular to the crack
front line and parallel to the interface
diameter

sxx
f

The MS was received on 11 January 2002 and was accepted after revision
for publication on 11 June 2002.
* Corresponding author: School of Metallurgy and Materials, IRCInterdisciplinary Research Centre, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston,
Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
L00302 # IMechE 2002

INTRODUCTION

The growth of monotonic and fatigue cracks approaching a

macroscopic interface between dissimilar materials is often
an important issue to be considered in structural integrity
assessments. Examples of such situations are found in
welded and diffusion-bonded components, surface coatings,
layered thin
lms and selectively reinforced materials [13].
In such cases, several factors control the fatigue crack
growth resistance.
The difference in the Youngs moduli of the components
of the bimaterial will produce both load partitioning and
elastic stress singularities that can equally affect the value of
the stress intensity factor and the stress intensity factor range
[410]. Basically, when the crack approaches the interface
from the stiffer material, there can be a sharp increase in the
stress intensity factor near the interface. Conversely, when
the crack approaches the interface from the weaker material,
there can be a strong decrease in the stress intensity factor,
as the crack gets closer to the interface. In metallic materials, although this effect is minimized by the plastic zone
ahead of the crack tip, effects are still observed [9]. Load
partitioning is expected to be signi
cant only in cases where
there is a high elastic mismatch, such as in ceramic coatings
on metallic substrates.

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications

246

M T MILAN AND P BOWEN

The plastic mismatch resulting from differences in the

yield stresses is responsible for a crack deceleration effect
when the interface is approached from the lower yield stress
material. Conversely, when the crack approaches the interface from the higher yield stress material, ampli
cation
occurs and the crack may accelerate [1, 3, 11, 12].
Also, the mismatch in both the thermal expansion coef
cients and Youngs moduli will result in a thermal residual
stress pro
le. The effects of residual stresses on fatigue
crack propagation have been reported by several authors [7,
1317]. Tensile residual stresses increase the crack growth
rate by an increase in the effective stress ratio, R0 . On the
other hand, compressive residual stresses reduce the fatigue
crack growth rate by a decrease in the stress intensity factor
range and/or stress ratio. As a consequence of the residual
stress pro
le, there is a possibility of partial crack closure if
the crack grows initially in a compressive residual stress

eld, resulting in higher fatigue crack growth rates, da=dN ,
in the transition from compressive to tensile
elds [16, 17].
The interface bonding strength will also play an important
role in how the crack will behave as it approaches the
interface, since low bonding interface strength can result in
crack growth along the interface or delamination, adding
additional complexities to the analysis [1822]. In the
present bimaterial systems, the existence of a strong interface bonding [2326] facilitates understanding such
systems.
In the Al alloy/Al alloy SiCp bimaterials (assuming that
both the yield stress and the Youngs modulus of the
composite are increased, and its thermal expansion coef
cient is decreased, compared with the monolithic material), a
synergy is expected between the thermal residual stresses
and the elastic/plastic mismatch close to the interface. The
effect of each parameter on the fatigue crack growth rate
will depend on from which side the crack approaches the
interface (Table 1).
Recent work shows that, when the crack approaches the
interface from the composite side, the fatigue crack growth
rate is primarily controlled by the compressive residual
stresses [2527]. When the interface is approached from
the aluminium side, the shielding effect of the elastic/plastic
mismatch seems to be the dominant feature [25, 26].

Table 1

Qualitative analysis of the predicted effects of residual

stresses, plastic mismatch and elastic mismatch on
fatigue crack propagation close to the interface for Al
alloy/Al alloy SiCp bimaterial
Effect on fatigue crack growth rate

Residual stress
Plastic mismatch
Elastic mismatch

Crack growth from

aluminium to composite

Crack growth from

composite to aluminium

"""
###
###

###
"""
"""

" Increase in the fatigue crack growth rate compared with the monolithic
material; # decrease in the fatigue crack growth rate compared with the
monolithic material.

Besides affecting the inherent fatigue properties of the

composites, particle size, particle volume fraction and
matrix composition are expected to affect both the thermal
residual stresses and the elastic/plastic mismatch. The main
aim of the present paper is to assess the effects of these
parameters on the fatigue crack growth rate of such Al alloy/
Al alloy SiCp bimaterials.

MATERIALS AND EXPERIMENTAL

PROCEDURES

The bimaterial systems of this study consist of cylinders of

Al alloy/Al alloy SiCp prepared by AMC (Aerospace
Metal Composites) and processed by powder metallurgy.
The SiC particles were mixed with the Al alloy powder by
mechanical alloying. Then, both the blended composite
powder and the Al alloy only powder were placed in a
can, one on top of the other. Hot isostatic pressing (HIP)
subsequently consolidated the bimaterial cylinders at 500 C
for 1 h. After consolidation, the cylinders were cooled down
to room temperature in air (T1 heat treatment) and no
subsequent heat treatment was applied. The overall dimensions of the cylinders were f 100 mm and t 100 mm.
The macroscopic interface between the reinforced and the
unreinforced Al alloy is located in the middle of the
cylinder. Several bimaterial systems were available for
testing with different matrix compositions, nominal particle
volume fractions (%) and average particle sizes as supplied
by AMC:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f )

Al2124/Al2124 17%SiC (3 mm),

Al2124/Al2124 25%SiC (3 mm),
Al2124/Al2124 35%SiC (3 mm),
Al2124/Al2124 25%SiC (20 mm),
Al6061/Al6061 25%SiC (3 mm),
Al6061/Al6061 40%SiC (3 mm).

The nominal chemical composition (in wt %) of the Al2124

is Al4Cu1.5Mg0.6Mn and that of the Al6061 is Al
0.3Cu1Mg0.6Si.
The thermal residual stress pro
les in the bimaterials were
evaluated using a combination of the layer removal method
and X-ray diffraction measurements [28]. The X-ray diffraction method is only capable of measuring surface stresses,
and therefore, in order to obtain the stresses that develop
parallel to the interface (along the depth of the specimen, up
to the interface), successive layers of material were removed
and the stresses were measured. To remove the layers, all the
faces of the specimen were wrapped with adhesive tape
except for the face parallel to the interface on which
measurements were taken. Then the specimen was
immersed in an aqueous solution of NaOH (20 per cent)
at room temperature. The initial thickness of the layers
removed was 500 mm, but at 2 mm from the interface the
thickness of removal was decreased to 100 mm for each step.
It is important to note that, to obtain a complete bimaterial
pro
le, two similar specimens (of equal composite and Al

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design
and Applications

L00302 # IMechE 2002

FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH RESISTANCE OF BIMATERIALS

alloy depths) are required, and the interface is approached

either from the aluminium side or from the composite side.
Then, the two stress pro
les obtained are superimposed. The
thermal residual stresses in the bimaterial are parallel to the
interface and biaxial (szz 0), but sxx syy and consequently the stresses in only one direction need to be
measured to obtain a complete description of the stress

eld. The stresses were measured along the direction
perpendicular to the crack front line, sxx , and parallel to
the interface. In this method, the removal of material
produces stress relaxation, and a correction was applied to
obtain the true stress pro
le [29].
Tensile tests were also performed in aluminium only and
composite only specimens to predict the extent of plastic/
elastic mismatch between the components of the bimaterials.
Tests were performed at air and room temperature in the aspressed condition (T1 heat treatment), at a crosshead speed
of 0.5 mm/min.
Four-point bending fatigue specimens (span 15 mm)
were cut from the blank (Fig. 1) using electrodischarge
machining. A 2.0 mm through-thickness notch was made in
either the composite side or the aluminium side of the
bimaterial specimen. A minimum fatigue precrack of
3 mm was then introduced in the specimens using loadshedding techniques. All fatigue tests were performed under
constant load range, R 0:3, at a frequency of 110 Hz, at
air and room temperature and in the as-pressed condition
(T1 heat treatment). The tests were designed to obtain the
same applied (nominal) stress intensity factor range at the
interface position for all the specimens of the same type, and
therefore to facilitate comparison. Cracks were monitored
using both direct current potential drop and replication
techniques; the fatigue crack growth rate was calculated
using the
ve-point secant method and plotted against the
applied stress intensity factor range.
Load partitioning was taken into account in the calculations of the stress intensity factors. The stress values were
calculated by the elastic theory of dissimilar beams using the
transformed section method [30]. All stress intensity factors
were then calculated using a weight function solution for a
single edge crack in a
nite-width plate [31]. Considering
that the weight function method is based on the initial stress
pro
le, for the residual stress intensity factor, Kr , calculations, it was assumed that no signi
cant residual stress
relaxation occurs provided that the plasticity ahead of the
crack tip remains small.

247

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Tensile tests

Tensile data are presented in Table 2. The results are an
average for three specimens of each material. It can be seen
that, the higher the SiC content, the higher are the yield
stress and the Youngs moduli. Also, it is observed that the
Al6061-based composites exhibit a higher increase in yield
stress (compared with the matrix) owing to the addition of
the SiC particles when compared with Al2124-based
composites of the same volume fraction and particle size.
As a consequence, as seen in Table 3, the plastic mismatch
(here de
ned as the ratio between the yield stress of
the composite and the yield stress of the aluminium alloy)
in the Al6061-based bimaterials is higher. Table 3 also
shows the elastic mismatch of the bimaterials which is
de
ned as the ratio between the Youngs modulus of the
composite and the Youngs modulus of the aluminium alloy.
3.2 Thermal residual stress
Figure 2 shows the thermal residual stress pro
les for some
of the bimaterials studied. Near the interface, a peak
compressive stress is observed on the composite side and
a peak tensile residual stress is seen on the aluminium side.
This was expected since the Al alloy SiCp composite
exhibits a lower thermal expansion coef
cient, a, than the
Al alloy because the SiC particles have a smaller a
(1:5 106 K 1 at room temperature) than the aluminium
alloy (22:9 106 K 1 at room temperature) [32]. At the
same time, another pair of lower stresses is developed away
from the interface and over a larger area to balance the
forces and moments produced by the peak residual stresses
close to the interface.
Table 2

Tensile properties of bimaterial components

Al2124
Al2124 17%SiC (3 mm)
Al2124 25%SiC (3 mm)
Al2124 35%SiC (3 mm)
Al2124 25%SiC (20 mm)
Al6061
Al6061 25%SiC (3 mm)
Al6061 40%SiC (3 mm)

Table 3

Youngs modulus
(GPa)

0.2% yield stress

(MPa)

70
100
115
135
115
70
115
140

159
181
272
395
170
100
225
425

Elastic and plastic mismatch

Elastic mismatch* Plastic mismatch{

Al2124/Al2124 17%SiC (3 mm)

Al2124/Al2124 25%SiC (3 mm)
Al2124/Al2124 35%SiC (3 mm)
Al2124/Al2124 25%SiC (20 mm)
Al6061/Al6061 25%SiC (3 mm)
Al6061/Al6061 40%SiC (3 mm)

Fig. 1

Bimaterial fatigue specimens (all dimensions are in

mm)

L00302 # IMechE 2002

1.43
1.64
1.93
1.64
1.64
2.00

1.13
1.70
2.21
1.07
2.25
4.25

* Youngs modulus of the composite/Youngs modulus of the aluminium

alloy; { yield stress of the composite/yield stress of the aluminium alloy.

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications

248

M T MILAN AND P BOWEN

Fig. 2

Thermal residual stress pro
les of some of the bimaterials

It can be seen that, for the same matrix and particle size,
the higher SiC content produces higher residual stresses
(Fig. 2). This is expected, as higher volume fractions of SiC
increase the mismatch both in the thermal expansion coef
cients and in the Youngs moduli. If both the matrix
composition and the volume fraction are kept constant, the
bimaterial with larger particles exhibits lower residual stresses, which suggests that they are dependent on the interparticle distance.
The matrix composition also affects the residual stresses.
The Al6061-based bimaterials show lower residual stresses
than the Al2124-based bimaterials, indicating that the residual stresses are also sensibly dependent on the yield stress
of the bimaterial components. This can be explained on the
basis of the residual stress relaxation due to the generation

Fig. 3

of dislocations on the Al alloy matrix (in the composite). A

lower-strength matrix increases the dislocation density
because plastic deformation takes place more easily and
therefore the residual stress levels are lower.
Figures 3 and 4 show the corresponding thermal residual
stress intensity factors, Kr , of the bimaterials. The general
trend observed is that, if the crack approaches the interface
from the composite side, Kr is initially positive and at the
interface there is a peak negative Kr . On the other hand, if
the crack grows from the aluminium side, Kr is initially
negative and there is a peak positive Kr at the interface. In
truth, a negative residual stress intensity factor does not
exist for a closed crack, but it means that, when an external
load is applied, the thermal residual stress pro
le shields the
crack, i.e. effectively reduces the local stress intensity factor.

Thermal residual stress intensity factor pro
les of different bimaterials. Crack growing from the
composite side to the aluminium alloy side

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design
and Applications

L00302 # IMechE 2002

FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH RESISTANCE OF BIMATERIALS

Fig. 4

Thermal residual stress intensity factor pro
les of different bimaterials. Crack growing from the
aluminium alloy side to the composite side

Comparing the different bimaterials, a combination of high

particle volume fraction/small particle size/Al2124 matrix
results in higher peak Kr at the interface.
It is important to note that Kr was calculated using a
weight function solution for a homogeneous material, and
therefore it does not include the effects of the elastic
mismatch on the stress intensity factor. Fett et al. [8]
presented a procedure for calculating the exact weight
function solution for edge cracks growing perpendicularly
to the interface in coated materials; their solution shows that
the accurate weight function increases above the values for a
homogeneous material solution if the crack approaches the
interface from the high modulus material, and vice versa.
This means that the present results underestimate Kr when
the crack approaches the interface from the composite side,
and overestimate Kr if the interface is approached from the
Al alloy side. Although the procedure proposed by Fett et al.
[8] seems to be the most appropriate for the present study, it
has the disadvantage of being limited to a very speci
c
geometry, and complicated
nite element calculations are
necessary to
nd the reference stress intensity factor solutions. Therefore, for simplicity, the homogeneous weight
function solution was adopted to calculate Kr here. Since the
applied K was calculated using the same solution, the
analysis is self-consistent, allowing direct comparisons
between the bimaterials to be made.

3.3 Fatigue crack growth resistance

3.3.1 Crack growth from the composite side to the
aluminium alloy side
In this case, previous work on Al alloy/Al alloy SiCp
bimaterials showed that the fatigue crack growth rate is
strongly dependent on the residual stress pro
le [2527].
Indeed, it was observed that the Al2124/Al2124 35%SiC
L00302 # IMechE 2002

249

(3 mm) and the Al2124/Al2124 25%SiC (3 mm) bimaterials exhibited crack arrest before the crack reached the
interface owing to the high compressive residual stresses
present, as seen in Fig. 5. It is important to observe that the
Al2124/Al2124 35%SiC (3 mm) has the highest negative Kr (Fig. 3), and arrest occurs at a slightly smaller crack
length (1 mm from the interface) than the arrest observed in
the Al2124/Al2124 25%SiC (3 mm) (0.5 mm from the
interface). For the Al2124/Al2124 17%SiC (3 mm),
which exhibits lower peak compressive stress close to
the interface, no crack arrest is observed, only a deceleration, and when the crack is close enough to the interface
(less than 1 mm) the ampli
cation caused by the elastic/
plastic mismatch overcomes the compressive residual
stress effect; the crack accelerates and crosses the interface. The high crack growth rates observed in the
Al2124/Al2124 35%SiC (3 mm) for low applied DK
(< 6 MPa m1=2 ) are probably a consequence of the higher
initial positive Kr , which, combined with the higher ampli
cation effect caused by the elastic mismatch, increases the
crack driving force. Moreover, it is important to note that the
Al2124 35%SiC (3 mm) exhibits a greater dependence on
both closure effects and static modes of failure (Kmax
dependence) owing to the high SiC content, and therefore
the effects of the residual stress on the fatigue crack growth
rate will be more signi
cant.
Matrix composition has a marked effect on the fatigue
crack growth rate of the bimaterials, as seen by comparing
Figs. 5 and 6. The Al6061-based bimaterials proved to have
lower thermal residual stresses (Fig. 2) and consequently
lower peak/balancing Kr (Fig. 3) than the Al2124-based
bimaterials. On the other hand, the plastic mismatch was
found to be much higher (Table 3) for the Al6061-based
bimaterials, and therefore the ampli
cation of the effective
K was stronger. This seems to explain the absence of
signi
cant crack retardation in the Al6061-based bimaterials

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications

250

M T MILAN AND P BOWEN

Fig. 5

Fatigue crack growth from the Al2124 SiC (3 mm) side to the Al2124 side in Al2124-based
bimaterials. Effect of particle volume fraction (same particle size and matrix composition)

(Fig. 6) as the crack approaches the interface, contrary to

that observed in the Al2124-based bimaterials.
The effects of Kr and elastic mismatch can also be
observed on the fatigue surfaces of the bimaterials. Figure
7 shows a comparison between the fatigue surfaces of
the Al2124 25%SiC (3 mm) (composite only) and the
Al2124/Al2124 25%SiC (3 mm) (composite side of the
bimaterial). The fractographs were taken at applied DK
values of 5 and 7 MPa m1=2 (immediately before the interface) for both the composite only and the composite side
of the bimaterial. In the composite only, the trend observed
is an increase in the fracture surface roughness with applied
DK, as already reported by several authors [3335]. According to McEvily et al. [34], the fracture surface roughness
increases with DK because the crack wake experiences
fewer closure cycles as DK increases and hence there is
less cumulative wear. Additionally, the increase in Kmax
increases the probability of particle damage and of microcracking ahead of the crack tip, and this may create a
preferential path for crack growth that increases the surface

Fig. 6

roughness [35, 36]. However, in the bimaterial, the opposite

is observed; the surface roughness decreases as the applied
DK increases. At low applied DK levels (5 MPa m1=2 ), the
crack tip is under the inuence of both positive Kr and
ampli
cation caused by the elastic mismatch; therefore, the
effective crack driving force is higher than the composite
only value, and the fracture surface of the bimaterial is
rougher than that of the composite only. As the crack
approaches the interface (applied DK 7 MPa m1=2 ), a
highly negative Kr appears, the crack driving force is
reduced below the composite only values, the crack
decelerates and the fracture surface is less rough.
Figure 8 shows the effects of particle size on the fatigue
crack growth resistance of Al2124-based bimaterials reinforced with 25%SiC. Owing to the larger particle size, the
height of crack deection due to the particles is higher and
the Al2124 25%SiC (20 mm) has a rough fracture surface
(Fig. 9) which results in a higher fatigue threshold and a
higher fatigue crack growth resistance. As a result, the crack
in the composite side of the bimaterial must be longer to

Fatigue crack growth from the Al6061 SiC (3 mm) side to the Al6061 side in Al6061-based
bimaterials. Effect of particle volume fraction (same particle size and matrix composition)

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design
and Applications

L00302 # IMechE 2002

FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH RESISTANCE OF BIMATERIALS

Fig. 7

Fractographs of fatigue surfaces: (a) composite only, applied DK 5 MPa m1=2 ; (b) composite only,
applied DK 7 MPa m1=2 ; (c) bimaterial (composite side), applied DK 5 MPa m1=2 ; (d) bimaterial
(composite side), applied DK 7 MPa m1=2

grow at the designed applied load. However, for such a crack

length, the crack tip proved to be close enough to the
interface to be already under the inuence of the negative
Kr . As a consequence, the combination of high threshold
and compressive thermal residual stress close to the interface made it impossible to grow the crack under an applied
load that would produce an applied DKint 7:7 MPa m1=2
close to the interface. Therefore, the load range had to be
increased incrementally and the test was conducted at an
equivalent applied DKint 9:7 MPa m1=2 at the interface.
The low plastic mismatch observed for this bimaterial (Table
3) helps to reinforce the effect of the residual stress because
the ampli
cation mechanism is consequently smaller in this
system. As a consequence, the Al2124 25%SiC (20 mm)/
Al2124 shows higher fatigue crack growth resistance than
the Al2124 25%SiC (3 mm)/Al2124 because of the
combination of higher closure levels (due to higher surface
roughness) and negative Kr close to the interface.
However, it is important to observe that in the
Al2124 25%SiC (20 mm)/Al2124, once the crack starts
growing, the crack growth rates increase very rapidly.
L00302 # IMechE 2002

251

3.3.2

Crack growth from the aluminium alloy side

to the composite side

When the crack grows towards the composite side, previous

work showed that the shielding effects caused by the elastic/
plastic mismatch seem to dominate over the tensile residual
stress near the interface [25, 26]. The fatigue crack growth
resistance curves of the Al2124-based composites reinforced with 3 mm SiC are presented in Fig. 10. It can be
seen that the fatigue crack growth rates of the bimaterials are
lower than the reference Al2124 only values. In these
cases, the crack is growing from the low elastic modulus
Al alloy to the high elastic modulus composite, and therefore a decrease in near-tip crack driving force is expected [5,
8]. Also, the plastic mismatch is expected to have a stronger
effect when the plastic zone ahead of the crack tip touches
the interface and the plasticity is constrained by the stronger
composite [11, 12]. Although the positive Kr near the
interface is expected to increase fatigue crack growth rates
by increasing R, the observed rates are still lower than the
Al alloy only values. This suggests that the shielding

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications

252

M T MILAN AND P BOWEN

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Fatigue crack growth from the Al2124 25%SiC side to the Al2124 side. Effect of particle size (same
particle volume fraction and matrix composition)

Fractograph of fatigue surface of Al2124 25%SiC

(20 mm), applied DK 6 MPa m1=2

Fig. 10

effects caused by the elastic/plastic mismatch are indeed

stronger than the thermal residual stress effects. Since the
main effect of a positive Kr is to increase R, it is possible
that the inuence of the residual stress is minimized because
the Al alloys are not signi
cantly affected by variations in R
over the Paris regime. From Fig. 10 it is also clear that a
higher content of SiC increases the shielding effects (higher
elastic/plastic mismatch), although the thermal residual
stresses are also higher. These results are consistent with
the conclusions of Kim et al. [37] who reported that, in
general, the strength of the shielding caused by the plastic
mismatch is more severe than the ampli
cation effects
observed with the same geometries and loading conditions.
Similar to the case where the crack approaches the interface from the composite side, the matrix composition proved
to have a signi
cant effect on the fatigue crack growth rates
of the bimaterials. The Al6061-based bimaterials showed a

Fatigue crack growth from the Al2124 side to the Al2124 SiC (3 mm) side in Al2124-based
bimaterials. Effect of particle volume fraction (same particle size and matrix composition). Data of
the Al2124 only specimen are also shown for reference

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design
and Applications

L00302 # IMechE 2002

FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH RESISTANCE OF BIMATERIALS

much stronger crack deceleration near the interface than the

Al2124-based bimaterials, as seen in Fig. 11. There are three
possible reasons for this:
1. The yield stress of the Al6061 is lower than the yield
stress of the Al2124, and consequently the plastic zone
size in the Al6061 is much larger.
2. The plastic mismatch is much higher in the Al6061based bimaterials (Table 3).
3. The tensile thermal residual stresses near the interface are
smaller in the Al6061-based bimaterials than in the
Al2124-based bimaterials (Fig. 4), resulting in lower
peak positive Kr at the interface (Fig. 6).
Therefore, the shielding effect caused by the plastic
mismatch when the crack grows towards the interface
from the Al alloy side is much more severe in the Al6061
bimaterial systems. In the present work such controlling
factors cannot be isolated further.
The effect of particle size can be seen in Fig. 12. The
Al2124/Al2124 25%SiC (20 mm) exhibits a lower plastic
mismatch than the Al2124/Al2124 25%SiC (3 mm) (Table
3) and the corresponding shielding effect is expected to be
smaller. On the other hand, the peak positive Kr at the
interface is also lower for the Al2124/Al2124 25%SiC
(20 mm) (Fig. 4). Both bimaterials exhibit similar fatigue
crack growth rates (Fig. 12), suggesting that the balance
between the tensile residual stress and the shielding caused
by elastic/plastic mismatch is approximately the same.
Although throughout the study trends have been established using single tests only, for selected cases, tests have
been repeated. In these repeat tests no marked variations in
fatigue crack growth rates were observed that would affect
the trends presented in this study.
In summary, these results again con
rm the hypothesis
that the fatigue crack growth resistance in Al alloy/Al
alloy SiCp bimaterials is largely the result of a competi-

Fig. 11

L00302 # IMechE 2002

253

tive mechanism established between the thermal residual

stresses and the elastic/plastic mismatch.

CONCLUSIONS

From the present work, the following conclusions can be

drawn in relation to Al alloy/Al alloy SiCp bimaterials:
1. Thermal residual stresses and elastic/plastic mismatch
(a) An increase in particle volume fraction increases
both the residual stresses (through the increase in
the mismatch of both the thermal expansion coef
cients and the Youngs moduli between the bimaterial
components) and the elastic/plastic mismatch
(through the increase in both the Youngs modulus
and the yield stress of the composite).
(b) An increase in particle size reduces both the residual
stresses (through the increase in interparticle distance
in the composite) and the plastic mismatch (through
the decrease in the yield stress of the composite).
(c) An increase in matrix yield stress increases the
residual stresses (by reducing plastic relaxation)
and reduces the plastic mismatch.
2. Fatigue crack propagation from the composite side
(a) Near the interface, the fatigue crack growth resistance is increased over that of the composite only.
This is deduced to be a result primarily of the
compressive residual stresses generated in the
composite side of the bimaterial.
(b) An increase in the particle volume fraction enhances
the crack deceleration because of the increased
compressive residual stress
eld near the interface,
although the ampli
cation effect caused by the
elastic/plastic mismatch also increases.

Fatigue crack growth from the Al6061 side to the Al6061 SiC (3 mm) side in Al6061-based
bimaterials. Effect of particle volume fraction (same particle size and matrix composition). Data of
the Al6061 only specimen are also shown for reference
Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications

254

M T MILAN AND P BOWEN

Fig. 12

Fatigue crack growth from the Al2124 side to the Al2124 25%SiC side. Effect of particle size
(same particle volume fraction and matrix composition). Data of the Al2124 only specimen are also
shown for reference

(c) An increase in the particle size results in increased

surface roughness which, combined with the
compressive residual stress near the interface and
lower plastic mismatch, increases the apparent fatigue threshold of the composite.
(d) The crack deceleration near the interface caused by
the compressive residual stress is more signi
cant in
the Al2124-based bimaterials than in the Al6061based bimaterials which have lower compressive
residual stresses and higher plastic mismatch.
3. Fatigue crack propagation from the aluminium alloy side
(a) Near the interface, the shielding effect caused by the
elastic/plastic mismatch is stronger than the effects of
the tensile residual stress and the fatigue crack
growth resistance of the bimaterial is increased
relative to that of the Al alloy only.
(b) An increase in particle volume fraction increases the
shielding effect of the elastic/plastic mismatch, and
the fatigue crack growth rate is reduced further in
spite of the increased peak tensile residual stress
close to the interface that is caused by the higher
particle volume fraction.
(c) An increase in particle size has no signi
cant effects
on the fatigue crack growth rate. This is deduced to
be because effects of reduced residual stresses and
reduced elastic/plastic mismatch balance out in terms
of fatigue crack growth resistance.
(d) The crack deceleration caused by the elastic/plastic
mismatch is more signi
cant for the Al6061-based
bimaterials which have a higher plastic mismatch and
lower tensile residual stress near the interface.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
One of the authors (M.T. Milan) was supported in the course
of this work by a scholarship from CNPq (Conselho

Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cienti
co e TecnologicoBrasil).

REFERENCES
1 Suresh, S., Sugimura, Y. and Tschegg, E. K. The growth of a
fatigue crack approaching a perpendicularlyoriented bimaterial
interface. Scr. Metall. Mater., 1992, 27, 11891194.
2 Ruf
es, P. C. Applications of advanced composites in gas aero
engines. In Proceedings of 9th International Conference on
Composite Materials, Madrid, 1992, pp. 123130 (Woodhead
Publishing).
3 Sugimura, Y., Suresh, S., Lim, P. G. and Shih, C. F. Fracture
normal to a bimaterial interface: effects of plasticity on cracktip shielding and ampli
cation. Acta Metall. Mater., 1995,
43(3), 11571169.
4 Zak, A. R. and Williams, M. L. Crack point stress singularities
at a bimaterial interface. J. Appl. Mechanics, 1963, 30, 142
143.
5 Erdogan, F. Fracture problems in composite materials. Engng
Fracture Mechs, 1972, 4, 811840.
6 Romeo, A. and Ballarini, R. A crack very close to a bimaterial
interface. J. Appl. Mechanics, 1995, 62, 614619.
7 Tanaka, T. and Hori, M. The propagation of the fatigue crack
crossing the interface of metal composites under the effect of
residual thermal stress. Bull. Jap. Soc. Mech. Engrs, 1979,
22(172), 13591367.
8 Fett, T., Diegele, E., Munz, D. and Rizzi, G. Weight functions
for edge cracks in thin surface layers. Int. J. Fracture, 1996, 81,
205215.
9 Deln, P., Gunnars, J. and Stahle, P. Effect of elastic
mismatch on the growth of a crack initially terminated at an
interface in elastic plastic bimaterials. Fatigue and Fracture
Engng Mater. and Struct., 1995, 18(10), 12011212.
10 Bleeck, O., Munz, D., Schaller, W. and Yang, Y. Y. Effect of
graded interlayer on the stress intensity factor of cracks in a joint
under thermal loading. Engng Fracture Mechanics, 1998, 60(6),
615623.

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design
and Applications

L00302 # IMechE 2002

FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH RESISTANCE OF BIMATERIALS

11 Suresh, S., Sugimura, Y. and Ogawa, T. Fatigue cracking in

materials with brittle surface coatings. Scr. Metall. Mater., 1993,
29, 237242.
12 Sugimura, Y., Suresh, S. and Grondin, L. Fatigue crack
growth at arbitrary angles to bimaterial interfaces. Scr. Metall.
Mater., 1995, 33(12), 20072012.
13 Itoh, Y. Z., Suruga, S. and Kashiwaya, H. Prediction of fatigue
crack growth rate in welding residual stress
elds. Engng
Fracture Mechanics, 1989, 33(3), 397407.
14 Ohji, K., Kubo, M., Tsuji, H., Ogawa, H. and Sakurada, K.
Methods of predicting fatigue crack growth lives in residual
stress
elds. Trans Jap. Soc. Mech. Engrs, 1987, 53, 1516
1524.
15 Kang, K. J., Song, J. H. and Earmme, Y. Y. Fatigue crack
growth and closure through a tensile residual stress
eld under
compressive loading. Fatigue Fracture Engng Mater.
Structures, 1989, 12(5), 363376.
16 Kang, K. J., Song, J. H. and Earmme, Y. Y. Fatigue crack
growth and closure behaviour through a compressive residual
stress
eld. Fatigue Fracture Engng Mater. Structures, 1990,
13(1), 113.
17 Choi, H. C. and Song, J. H. Finite element analysis of closure
behaviour of fatigue cracks in residual stress
elds. Fatigue
Fracture Engng Mater. Structures, 1995, 18(1), 105117.
18 Doel, T. J. A., Cardona, D. C. and Bowen, P. Fatigue crack
growth in selectively reinforced titanium metal matrix composites. Int. J. Fatigue, 1998, 20(1), 3550.
19 Ramamurty, U. Fatigue in selectively
ber-reinforced titanium
matrix composites. Metall. Mater. Trans, 1999, 30(8), 2237
2248.
20 McCoy, J. H., Kumar, A. S. and Stubbins, J. F. Effects of
interface and tensile properties in the dynamic fracture of
layered structures. J. Nucl. Mater., 1999, 270, 129133.
21 Stubbins, J. F., Collins, J. and Min, J. Evaluation of the
deformation
elds and bond integrity of Cu/SS joints. J. Nucl.
Mater., 2000, 283287, 982986.
22 Leedy, K. D. and Stubbins, J. F. Copper alloystainless steel
bonded laminates for fusion reactor applications: crack growth
and fatigue. Mater. Sci. and Engng, 2001, A297, 1925.
23 Ellis, L. Y. and Lewandowski, J. J. Laminated composites with
improved bend ductility and toughness. J. Mater. Sci. Lett.,
1991, 10, 461463.

L00302 # IMechE 2002

255

24 Ellis, L. Y. and Lewandowski, J. J. Effects of layer thickness

on impact toughness of Al/AlSiCp. Mater. Sci. Engng, 1994,
A183, 5967.
25 Yang, N. PhD thesis, University of Birmingham, 2000.
26 Milan, M. T. and Bowen, P. Fatigue crack growth resistance of
selectively reinforced aluminium alloys. In Proceedings of
European Conference on Advances in Mechanical Behaviour,
Plasticity and Damage, Euromat2000, 2000, Vol. 2, pp. 1007
1014 (Elsevier).
27 Uzun, H., Lindley, T. C., McShane, H. B. and Rawlings, R. D.
Fatigue crack growth behavior of 2124/SiC/10p functionally
graded materials. Metall. Mater. Trans A, 2001, 32A(7), 1831
1839.
28 Lu, J. Handbook of Measurements of Residual Stress, 1996
(Soc. for Exp. Mech.).
29 Li, H., Li, J. B. and Wang, Z. G. Correction of removal for
double-layer plate of ceramic/metal in X-ray stress measurements. J. Mater. Sci. Lett., 1997, 16, 15551557.
30 Beer, F. P. and Johnston, E. R. Mechanics of Materials, 1981
(McGraw-Hill).
31 Wu, X. R. and Carlsson A. J. Weight Functions and Stress
Intensity Factor Solutions, 1991 (Pergamon Press).
32 Metals Handbook, 10th edition, 1979, Vol. 2 (ASM International).
33 Doel, T. J. A. PhD thesis, University of Birmingham, 1992.
34 McEvily, A. J., Renauld, M., Bao, H. and Shover, R. Fatigue
fracture-surface roughness and the K-opening level. Int. J.
Fatigue, 1997, 19(89), 629633.
35 Li, X. W., Tian, J. F., Han, N. L., Kang, Y. and Wang, Z. G.
Quantitative study of correlation between fracture surface
roughness and fatigue properties of SiC/Al composites. Mater.
Lett., 1996, 29, 235240.
36 Chen, E. Y., Lawson, L. and Meshii, M. The effect of fatigue
microcracks on rapid catastrophic failure in AlSiC composites.
Mater. Sci. Engng, 1995, A200, 192206.
37 Kim, A. S., Suresh, S. and Shih, C. F. Plasticity effects on
fracture normal to interfaces with homogeneous and graded
compositions. Int. J. Solids and Struct., 1997, 34(26), 3415
3432.

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com by Narayanasamy P on October 18, 2011

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications