Minerals Beneficiation - The Mechanism of Fracture Propagation

Forty years ago A. A. Griffith developed a theory explaining why brittle materials displayed such low tensile strengths.' He based his views on two points. First, he found himself compelled to assume that all brittle materials are replete with flaws, cracks, and other defects that act, although quite invisible, as large stress raisers. Second, he applied the "theorem of minimum potential energy," which says that the total potential energy of a system must pass from the unbroken to the broken condition by a process involving a continuous decrease in potential energy. By this means he satisfactorily accounted for the noted low strength of such solids and also for the wide spread obtained in experimental measurement of these strengths. So successful has the theory been that it is favored by some to this day. Unfortunately this theory is of limited use beyond the explanation of these two noted phenomena and it is keenly felt that a better theoretical insight into the physics of the fracturing process is needed as the volume of experimental evidence accumulates. The author proposes in the following to build on the fundamentally sound concepts of Griffith and, with the help of increased theoretical knowledge over that available to Griffith, develop a mechanism for frac-ture which will provide far greater understanding of the experimental evidence accumulated to date than is possible from the original Griffith idea. THE GRlFFlTH THEORY Very little progress indeed can be made without accepting the first postulate of Griffith which supposes all brittle solids to be full of microcracks. It would be difficult indeed to find a better mechanism for the small strength of such brittle materials, in conjunction with the fact that the energy that must be expended for comminution is by no means small. The postulate of the existence of the microcracks permits the breakup of the various bonds a few at a time by concentrating the stress at the tip of the progressing crack, while the total energy expended is the same as if they all had been ruptured simultaneously. The only flaw in the argument is that no reasonable explanation has been proposed to account for the genesis of such cracks. Indeed their very presence is in violation of the Griffith second postulate, the potential energy theorem. This theorem is straightforward for isothermal processes, and, in spite of Griffith, there is some doubt that treating the problem isothermally is legitimate. The surface energy of bodies is a free energy, not a potential energy as stated by Griffith, and the production of new surface free energies is not necessarily an isothermal process. There is ample evidence to the contrary. Generally speaking, if heating a body increases its surface area, then, by virtue of Le Chatelier's principle, any increase of that area by other means will tend to lower its surface temperature. Lord Kelvin calculated the actual cooling that resulted in drawing out a film of liquid.2 R. A. Houston calculated the surface cooling that resulted in stretching a metal wire.3 These calculations were made by applying the Carnot cycle to the process and evaluating the thermodynamics thereof. IRREVERSIBILITY OF THE FRACTURING PROCESS While Griffith was very careful not to say so, the impression gained from studying his papers is that he considered the fracturing process as reversible, that is, a succession of quasi-equilibrium states. There is ample evidence that it is not. The indication that the new surfaces produced by the propagation of a crack are cooler than the original body points to an irreversible heat flow from the interior to the new surfaces to equalize the temperatures. If the process be reversible, any crack accidentally formed should immediately close up as, in the absence of any strain energy, the potential energy would thereby be lowered. The fact that they do not, constitutes a paradox. Such paradoxes are nothing new where certain phenomena that propagate from minuscule nuclei are assumed to be reversible. Such is, for instance, the condensation of a pure saturated vapor that is suddenly chilled by adiabatic expansion. At the beginning the tiny droplets that are formed should be only a few angstroms in size, but the vapor pressure at such droplets is so high that they should evaporate at once. A similar situation arises if a saturated pure solution becomes super-saturated upon cooling; the first tiny crystal nuclei should dissolve as fast as