The practice of attempting validation of crack-propagation laws (i.e., the laws of Head, Frost and Dugdale, McEvily and Illg, Liu, and Paris) with a small amount of data, such as a few single specimen test results, is questioned. It is shown that all the laws, though they are mutually contradictory, can be in agreement with the same small sample of data. It is suggested that agreement with a wide selection of data from many specimens and over many orders of magnitudes of crack-extension rates may be necessary to validate crack-propagation laws. For such a wide comparison of data a new simple empirical law is given which fits the broad trend of the data.

This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.