Multi-Tier Tensile Strain Models for Strain-Based Design: Part 1 — Fundamental Basis

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong-Yi Wang ◽  
Ming Liu ◽  
Fan Zhang ◽  
David Horsley ◽  
Steve Nanney
Keyword(s):  
Physical Process ◽  
Tensile Strain ◽  
Limit State ◽  
General Concept ◽  
Tensile Failure ◽  
Experiment Data ◽  
Limit States ◽  
Strain Design ◽  
Associated Representation ◽  
Tensile Strain Capacity

This is the first paper in a three-paper series on the tensile strain design of pipelines. The formulation of the multi-tier models [1] and evaluation of the models against experiment data [2] are presented in two companion papers. This paper starts with an introduction of general concept of strain-based design. The central part of the paper is then devoted to the tensile strain capacity, including (1) physical process of tensile strain failure, (2) limit states of tensile strain failure and associated toughness representation, and (3) fundamental basis of tensile strain models. The most significant part of the fundamental basis, the limit state of tensile failure and associated representation of the material’s toughness, is given the greatest amount of attention.

Tensile Strain Models for Strain-Based Design of Pipelines

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong-Yi Wang ◽  
Ming Liu ◽  
Yaxin Song ◽  
David Horsley
Keyword(s):  
Material Properties ◽  
Tensile Strain ◽  
Weld Strength ◽  
Limit States ◽  
Design Models ◽  
Strain Capacity ◽  
Strain Design ◽  
Level 3 ◽  
Tensile Strain Capacity

This paper covers the development of tensile strain design models using a multidisciplinary approach, including fundamental fracture mechanics, small-scale material characterization tests, and large-scale tests of full-size pipes. The tensile strain design models are formulated in a four-level format. The Level 1 procedure provides estimated tensile strain capacity (TSC) in a tabular format for quick initial assessment. The initiation toughness alternatively termed apparent toughness is estimated from upper shelf Charpy impact energy. The Level 2 procedure contains a set of parametric equations based on an initiation-control limit state. The tensile strain capacity can be computed from these equations with the input of a pipe’s dimensional and material property parameters. The apparent toughness is estimated from either upper shelf Charpy energy or upper shelf toughness of standard CTOD test specimens. The Level 3 procedure uses the same set of equations as in Level 2 and the toughness values are obtained from low-constraint tests. In the Level 3 procedure, two limit states based on either initiation control or ductile instability can be used. The Level 4 procedure allows the use of direct FEA calculation to develop crack driving force relations. The same limit states as those in Level 3 may be used. The Level 4 procedures should only be used by seasoned experts in special circumstances where lower level procedures are judged inappropriate. The tensile strain design models may be used for the following purposes: (1) The determination of tensile strain capacity for a given set of material properties and flaw size. (2) The determination of acceptable flaw sizes for a given set of material properties and target tensile strain capacity. (3) The selection of material properties to achieve a target strain capacity for a given flaw size. (4) The optimization of the tensile strain capacity by balancing the requirements of material parameters, such as weld strength (thus weld strength mismatch level) versus toughness. The application of the tensile strain design models is given in a companion paper.

Multi-Tier Tensile Strain Models for Strain-Based Design: Part 2 — Development and Formulation of Tensile Strain Capacity Models

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming Liu ◽  
Yong-Yi Wang ◽  
Yaxin Song ◽  
David Horsley ◽  
Steve Nanney
Keyword(s):  
Driving Force ◽  
Tensile Strain ◽  
Weld Strength ◽  
Experiment Data ◽  
Pipe Wall Thickness ◽  
Crack Driving Force ◽  
Strain Capacity ◽  
Welding Processes ◽  
Tensile Strain Capacity

This is the second paper in a three-paper series related to the development of tensile strain models. The fundamental basis of the models [1] and evaluation of the models against experiment data [2] are presented in two companion papers. This paper presents the structure and formulation of the models. The philosophy and development of the multi-tier tensile strain models are described. The tensile strain models are applicable for linepipe grades from X65 to X100 and two welding processes, i.e., mechanized GMAW and FCAW/SMAW. The tensile strain capacity (TSC) is given as a function of key material properties and weld and flaw geometric parameters, including pipe wall thickness, girth weld high-low misalignment, pipe strain hardening (Y/T ratio), weld strength mismatch, girth weld flaw size, toughness, and internal pressure. Two essential parts of the tensile strain models are the crack driving force and material’s toughness. This paper covers principally the crack driving force. The significance and determination of material’s toughness are covered in the companion papers [1,2].

scholarly journals Reliability Analysis of Anchored Geotechnical Structures for the Design Limit States

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-47
Author(s):  
Sohaib K Al-Mamoori ◽  
Laheab A. Al-Maliki ◽  
Khaled El-Tawel
Keyword(s):  
Reliability Analysis ◽  
Reliability Index ◽  
Failure Modes ◽  
Limit State ◽  
Tensile Failure ◽  
Limit States ◽  
Geotechnical Parameters ◽  
Retaining Structure ◽  
Geotechnical Structures ◽  
Bending Failure

Reliability has been considered of magnificent importance in engineering design specially in geotechnical engineering due to the unpredictable conditions of soil layers. It is essential to establish well- designed failure modes that could guarantee safety and durability of the proposed structure. This study aims to suggest a reliability analyses procedure for retaining walls by the mean of a reliability index β using the specifications of AASHTO Bridge Design 2002, Eurocode 7, and DIN EN 1993-5 norms. Two failure modes; Tensile failure of tendon (G1) and Failure by bending (G2) were studied and compared by using equation of the Design Limit State (DLS) and by taking some basic geotechnical parameters as Random Variables RV. The analyses demonstrated that the reliability index β and probability of failure Pf are the most important parameter in the reliability analysis. Also, the suitable height (H) for the retaining structure (for all angles ϴ) equals to 6 m and the most critical angle is ϴ= 45º to prevent the failure by tensile of tendon. While the bending failure reliability analysis shows that all heights of retaining structure are suitable. After comparing the two cases it was found that (G1) is more dangerous than (G2).

scholarly journals Equilibrium states of a Bose gas with repulsive interactions

1980 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ola Bratteli ◽  
Derek W. Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Limit State ◽  
Bose Gas ◽  
Cyclic Vector ◽  
Infinite Volume ◽  
Limit States ◽  
Positive Interaction ◽  
Volume Limit ◽  
Associated Representation ◽  
Reduced Density ◽  
Infinite Volume Limit

AbstractWe consider infinite volume limit Gibbs states of a nonrelativistic quantum Bose gas consisting of one species of spinless particles with positive interaction potentials. The finite volume reduced density matrices are dominated by the corresponding matrices for the noninteracting gas, and as a consequence all infinite volume limit states are regular, locally normal, and analytic on the appropriate CCR algebra. For sufficiently short range repulsive two-body interactions, the cyclic vector associated with the limit state is separating for the σ-weak closure of the algebra in the associated representation.

Enhanced Apparent Toughness Approach to Tensile Strain Design

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming Liu ◽  
Yong-Yi Wang ◽  
Xin Long
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Tensile Strain ◽  
Essential Element ◽  
Initial Growth ◽  
Resistance Curve ◽  
Strain Capacity ◽  
Strain Design ◽  
Tangent Method ◽  
Tensile Strain Capacity

Tensile strain design is an essential element of the overall strain-based design methodology. This paper focuses on the apparent toughness approach and introduces the concept of apparent CTOD resistance curve (CTODR). The determination of apparent toughness, CTODA, from the apparent CTODR is demonstrated. The prediction of tensile strain capacity (TSC) using the CTODA and the traditional tangent method is conducted. Similar results are obtained from both approaches. The value of apparent CTODR is found to be relatively insensitive to the amount of flaw growth after some limited initial growth. This insensitivity allows the determination of CTODA at the small amount of flaw growth. This feature establishes the connection between CTODA and initiation-based toughness. Further work is under way to apply these findings.

A Quantitative Approach to Tensile Strain Capacity of Pipelines

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong-Yi Wang ◽  
Ming Liu ◽  
David Horsley ◽  
Joe Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Determination ◽  
Tensile Strain ◽  
Limit State ◽  
Ultimate Limit State ◽  
Strain Capacity ◽  
Closed Form Solutions ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
Girth Welds ◽  
Tensile Strain Capacity

Tensile strain rupture is an ultimate limit state. A limit state is stated in generic terms of “load” and “resistance” or alternatively termed “demand” and “capacity.” The “demand” of tensile rupture limit state is mostly related to displacement-controlled loading, such as that induced by frost heave, landslide, and seismic activities. The “capacity” is most often controlled by girth weld tensile strain limits, as girth welds tend to be the weakest link in pipelines experiencing high tensile strains. The tensile strain limits of girth welds are affected by a large number of factors: tensile and toughness properties of the pipe and weld, weld geometry, stress state, defect size and location. Consequently, closed-form solutions for tensile strain limits of girth welds do not yet exist in codes and standards. PRCI and TransCanada have funded a number of projects in recent years to develop fracture-mechanics-based procedures aimed at quantitative determination of girth weld tensile strain limits. The results of these projects, along with the reviews and examination of available experiment data by the authors, have culminated in a set of recommended procedures that enable the quantitative determination of the tensile strain capacity of pipelines. The required input parameters, formulae for the computation of tensile strain limits, limits of applicability, and suggested methods of applications are specified in the proposed procedures. This paper covers the technical basis of the procedures. Particular emphasis is placed on the validation of these procedures. The limitations of the procedures and future directions of improvements are suggested. It is believed that these procedures may lay the initial groundwork towards the eventual code implementation of a comprehensive set of tools for quantitative strain-based design of pipelines.

Combined flexure and torsion of I-shaped steel beams

1989 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert G. Driver ◽  
D. J. Laurie Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
Limit State ◽  
Bending Moment ◽  
Phase Behaviour ◽  
Inelastic Interaction ◽  
Steel Beams ◽  
Ultimate Limit State ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Design Standards ◽  
Limit States ◽  
Interaction Diagram

Design standards provide little information for the design of I-shaped steel beams not loaded through the shear centre and therefore subjected to combined flexure and torsion. In particular, methods for determining the ultimate capacity, as is required in limit states design standards, are not presented. The literature on elastic analysis is extensive, but only limited experimental and analytical work has been conducted in the inelastic region. No comprehensive design procedures, applicable to limit states design standards, have been developed.From four tests conducted on cantilever beams, with varying moment–torque ratios, it is established that the torsional behaviour has two distinct phases, with the second dominated by second-order geometric effects. This second phase is nonutilizable because the added torsional restraint developed is path dependent and, if deflections had been restricted, would not have been significant. Based on the first-phase behaviour, a normal and shearing stress distribution on the cross section is proposed. From this, a moment–torque ultimate strength interaction diagram is developed, applicable to a number of different end and loading conditions. This ultimate limit state interaction diagram and serviceability limit states, based on first yield and on distortion limitations, provide a comprehensive design approach for these members. Key words: beams, bending moment, flexure, inelastic, interaction diagram, I-shaped, limit states, serviceability, steel, torsion, torque, ultimate.

Anchor rod forces and maximum bending moments in sheet pile walls using the factored strength approach

1996 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 815-821 ◽  
Author(s):  
A B Schriver ◽  
A J Valsangkar
Keyword(s):  
Water Pressure ◽  
Limit State ◽  
Bending Moment ◽  
Ultimate Limit State ◽  
Sheet Pile ◽  
Limit States ◽  
Working Stress ◽  
Geotechnical Design ◽  
Ultimate Limit State Design ◽  
Sheet Pile Wall

Recently, the limit states approach using factored strength has been recommended in geotechnical design. Some recent research has indicated that the application of limit states design using recommended load and strength factors leads to conservative designs compared with the conventional methods. In this study the influence of sheet pile wall geometry, type of water pressure distribution, and different methods of analysis on the maximum bending moment and achor rod force are presented. Recommendations are made to make the factored strength design compatible with conventional design. Key words: factored strength, working stress design, ultimate limit state design, anchored sheet pile wall, bending moment, anchor rod force.

Influence of Human Error on Structural Reliability

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Brehm ◽  
Robert Hertle ◽  
Markus Wetzel
Keyword(s):  
Human Error ◽  
Structural Reliability ◽  
Failure Modes ◽  
Structural Model ◽  
Limit State ◽  
Design Procedure ◽  
Material Strength ◽  
Limit States ◽  
The Impact

In common structural design, random variables, such as material strength or loads, are represented by fixed numbers defined in design codes. This is also referred to as deterministic design. Addressing the random character of these variables directly, the probabilistic design procedure allows the determination of the probability of exceeding a defined limit state. This probability is referred to as failure probability. From there, the structural reliability, representing the survival probability, can be determined. Structural reliability thus is a property of a structure or structural member, depending on the relevant limit states, failure modes and basic variables. This is the basis for the determination of partial safety factors which are, for sake of a simpler design, applied within deterministic design procedures. In addition to the basic variables in terms of material and loads, further basic variables representing the structural model have to be considered. These depend strongly on the experience of the design engineer and the level of detailing of the model. However, in the clear majority of cases [1] failure does not occur due to unexpectedly high or low values of loads or material strength. The most common reasons for failure are human errors in design and execution. This paper will provide practical examples of original designs affected by human error and will assess the impact on structural reliability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document