Fracture behavior of large-scale thin-sheet aluminum alloy

A series of fracture tests on large-scale, pre-cracked, aluminum alloy panels is being carried out to examine and to characterize the process by which cracks propagate and link up in this material. Extended grips and test fixtures were specially designed to enable the panel specimens to be loaded in tension, in a 1780-kN-capacity universal testing machine. Twelve panel specimens, each consisting of a single sheet of bare 2024-T3 aluminum alloy, 3988 mm high, 2286 mm wide, and 1.016 mm thick are being fabricated with simulated through-cracks oriented horizontally at mid-height. Using existing information, a test matrix has been set up that explores regions of failure that are controlled by fracture mechanics, with additional tests near the boundary between plastic collapse and fracture. In addition, a variety of multiple site damage (MSD) configurations have been included to distinguish between various proposed linkage mechanisms. All tests but one use anti-buckling guides. At this writing seven specimens have been tested. Three were fabricated with a single central crack, three others had multiple cracks on each side of the central crack, and one had a single crack but no anti-buckling guides. Each fracture event was recorded on film, video, computer, magnetic tape, and occasionally optical microscopy. The visual showed the crack tip with a load meter in the field of view, using motion picture film for one tip and SVHS video tape for the other. The computer recorded the output of the testing machine load cell, the stroke, and twelve strain gages at 1.5 second intervals. A wideband FM magnetic tape recorder was used to record data from the same sources. The data were analyzed by two different procedures: (1) the plastic zone model based on the residual strength diagram; and (2) the R-curve. The first three tests were used to determine the basic material properties, and these results were then used in the analysis of the two subsequent tests with MSD cracks. There is good agreement between measured values and results obtained from the model.