Issue 53

I. Monetto et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 53 (2020) 372-393; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.53.29 382 discrepancies are observed also in results obtained using Euler-Bernoulli beam theory and imply that the other root rotation compliance coefficients calculated a posteriori using Eqns. (18), (22), (24) and (25) differ from those of 2D elasticity in Table 10. This is shown in Figs. 4-8 and 9, which also highlight that the values of 0 V d and 0 M d are quite well reproduced when one of the two compliance coefficients is chosen for matching, while quite significant differences are found on the derived coefficients when matching is performed on 0 N d . Figure 7: Relative deflection compliance coefficients under symmetrical transverse forces for isotropic materials (  =  =1) with varying Poisson ratio  =0,0.3. Figure 8: Relative deflection compliance coefficients under a pair of longitudinal forces for degenerate orthotropic materials (  =1) with  xz =0.3 and varying  =0.5,1. The discrepancies between the sets of results for each compliance coefficient find an explanation in the different description of the mechanical behavior according to the beam theory and 2D plane stress conditions. This represents a limit of applicability for the structural model proposed in the paper to specimens having a relative position of the delamination lower than 0.6.