<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">469124784</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180323133148.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">170328e19921201xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1007/BF00015615</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/BF00015615</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">Comparison between various displacement-based stress intensity factor computation techniques</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[I. Lim, I. Johnston, S. Choi]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">The computation of the stress intensity factor at a crack tip can be determined from the nodal displacements along the crack face. Amongst the existing techniques available are the Displacement Correlation Technique (DCT), the Quarter-Point Displacement Technique (QPDT) and the Displacement Extrapolation Technique (DET). As each of these techniques are popular in general LEFM analysis, an evaluation of their relative performances would seem appropriate. Previously, only limited comparisons have been made. In this paper the comparison is made on the basis of extensive numerical analysis. In addition two new variants to the DET are introduced and shown to be more efficient computationally. The results indicate that the QPDT is generally more accurate and consistent in performance than the DCT. The DET, however, exhibited some erratic characteristics. Detailed examinations revealed that the linear regression analysis employed in the DET for the extrapolation is highly sensitive to the nodal displacement distribution. Both the new variant DETs exhibited much more consistent behaviour.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1992</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Lim</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">I.</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, 3168, Clayton, Victoria, Australia</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Johnston</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">I.</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, 3168, Clayton, Victoria, Australia</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Choi</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">S.</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Division of Geomechanics, CSIRO, 3149, Syndal, Victoria, Australia</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">International Journal of Fracture</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">58/3(1992-12-01), 193-210</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0376-9429</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">58:3&lt;193</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">1992</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">58</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">10704</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00015615</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00015615</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Lim</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">I.</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, 3168, Clayton, Victoria, Australia</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Johnston</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">I.</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, 3168, Clayton, Victoria, Australia</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Choi</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">S.</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Division of Geomechanics, CSIRO, 3149, Syndal, Victoria, Australia</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">International Journal of Fracture</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">58/3(1992-12-01), 193-210</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0376-9429</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">58:3&lt;193</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">1992</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">58</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">10704</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Metadata rights reserved</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">Springer special CC-BY-NC licence</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-springer</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
