The processes of material manufacture, processing, machining, and forming may introduce flaws in a finished mechanical component. Arising from the manufacturing process, interior and surface flaws are found in all metal structures. Not all such flaws are unstable under service conditions. Fracture mechanics is the analysis of flaws to discover those that are safe (that is, do not grow) and those that are liable to propagate as cracks and so cause failure of the flawed structure. Despite these inherent flaws, it is possible to achieve through damage tolerance analysis the safe operation of a structure. Fracture mechanics as a subject for critical study has barely been around for a century and thus is relatively new. Fracture mechanics should attempt to provide quantitative answers to the following questions: What is the strength of the component as a function of crack size? What crack size can be tolerated under service loading, i.e. what is the maximum permissible crack size? How long does it take for a crack to grow from a certain initial size, for example the minimum detectable crack size, to the maximum permissible crack size? What is the service life of a structure when a certain pre-existing flaw size (e.g. a manufacturing defect) is assumed to exist? During the period available for crack detection how often should the structure be inspected for cracks? Linear elastic fracture mechanics Griffith's criterion Fracture mechanics was developed during World War I by English aeronautical engineer A. A. Griffith – thus the term Griffith crack – to explain the failure of brittle materials. Griffith's work was motivated by two contradictory facts: The stress needed to fracture bulk glass is around . The theoretical stress needed for breaking atomic bonds of glass is approximately . A theory was needed to reconcile these conflicting observations. Also, experiments on glass fibers that Griffith himself conducted suggested that the fracture stress increases as the fiber diameter decreases. Hence the uniaxial tensile strength, which had been used extensively to predict material failure before Griffith, could not be a specimen-independent material property. Griffith suggested that the low fracture strength observed in experiments, as well as the size-dependence of strength, was due to the presence of microscopic flaws in the bulk material. To verify the flaw hypothesis, Griffith introduced an artificial flaw in his experimental glass specimens. The artificial flaw was in the form of a surface crack which was much larger