Mode I fracture toughness determination with straight notched disk bending method

By L. Tutluoglu, Ç. Keleş. 2011

166 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

ISRM-Suggested Method for Determining the Mode I Static Fracture Toughness Using Semi-Circular Bend Specimen (2013, background): “Table 3 Numerical values of Y 0 , present results compared with those of Tutluoglu and Keles (2011) b ¼ a=R s/2R Present results Tutluoglu and Keles (2011) 0.3 0.5 2.495 2.538 0.5 0.5 3.679 3.550 0.67 0.5 5.835 6.209 Using a fixed arbitrary load P, the stress intensity factor KI was determined for…”
Rock Fracture Toughness Study Under Mixed Mode I/III Loading (2017, methodology): “Recently, the symmetric ENDB specimen was employed successfully by Tutluoglu and Keles (2011) for determining mode I fracture toughness of some rock materials.”
A Further Improved Maximum Tangential Stress Criterion for Assessing Mode I Fracture of Rocks Considering Non-singular Stress Terms of the Williams Expansion (2018, methodology): “Straight-notched disc bend method (Aliha and Bahmani 2017; Tutluoglu and Keles 2011) SNDB method Three-point bending Flattened Brazilian disc method (Keles and Tutluoglu 2011) FBD method Brazilian-type compression Modified ring method (Tutluoglu and Keles 2012) MR method Brazilian-type compression E”
Effects of temperature and confining pressure on mixed-mode (I–II) and mode II fracture toughness of Kimachi sandstone (2014, methodology): “Tutluoglu and Keles [29] found that the fracture toughness values of andesite measured using CCNBD, SCB, and SNDB specimens were 1.”