Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHenzel, Thomas
dc.contributor.authorNijjer, Japinder
dc.contributor.authorChockalingam, S
dc.contributor.authorWahdat, Hares
dc.contributor.authorCrosby, Alfred J
dc.contributor.authorYan, Jing
dc.contributor.authorCohen, Tal
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-10T17:56:41Z
dc.date.available2023-03-10T17:56:41Z
dc.date.issued2022-09-01
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/148462
dc.description.abstract<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>Cavitation has long been recognized as a crucial predictor, or precursor, to the ultimate failure of various materials, ranging from ductile metals to soft and biological materials. Traditionally, cavitation in solids is defined as an unstable expansion of a void or a defect within a material. The critical applied load needed to trigger this instability -- the critical pressure -- is a lengthscale independent material property and has been predicted by numerous theoretical studies for a breadth of constitutive models. While these studies usually assume that cavitation initiates from defects in the bulk of an otherwise homogeneous medium, an alternative and potentially more ubiquitous scenario can occur if the defects are found at interfaces between two distinct media within the body. Such interfaces are becoming increasingly common in modern materials with the use of multimaterial composites and layer-by-layer additive manufacturing methods. However, a criterion to determine the threshold for interfacial failure, in analogy to the bulk cavitation limit, has yet to be reported. In this work, we fill this gap. Our theoretical model captures a lengthscale independent limit for interfacial cavitation, and is shown to agree with our observations at two distinct lengthscales, via two different experimental systems. To further understand the competition between the two cavitation modes (bulk versus interface), we expand our investigation beyond the elastic response to understand the ensuing unstable propagation of delamination at the interface. A phase diagram summarizes these results, showing regimes in which interfacial failure becomes the dominant mechanism.</jats:p>en_US
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherOxford University Press (OUP)en_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac217en_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licenseen_US
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_US
dc.sourceOxford University Pressen_US
dc.titleInterfacial cavitationen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.citationHenzel, Thomas, Nijjer, Japinder, Chockalingam, S, Wahdat, Hares, Crosby, Alfred J et al. 2022. "Interfacial cavitation." PNAS Nexus, 1 (4).
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineeringen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Aeronautics and Astronauticsen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Mechanical Engineeringen_US
dc.relation.journalPNAS Nexusen_US
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticleen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/PeerRevieweden_US
dc.date.updated2023-03-10T17:43:27Z
dspace.orderedauthorsHenzel, T; Nijjer, J; Chockalingam, S; Wahdat, H; Crosby, AJ; Yan, J; Cohen, Ten_US
dspace.date.submission2023-03-10T17:43:28Z
mit.journal.volume1en_US
mit.journal.issue4en_US
mit.licensePUBLISHER_CC
mit.metadata.statusAuthority Work and Publication Information Neededen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record