Stress Intensity Factors of a Three-Point Bend Specimen Under Dynamic Loading

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuh J. Chao ◽  
Poh-Sang Lam
Keyword(s):  
Stress Intensity Factor ◽  
Stress Intensity ◽  
Stress Intensity Factors ◽  
Image Correlation ◽  
Dynamic Loads ◽  
Bend Specimen ◽  
Intensity Factors ◽  
Displacement Fields ◽  
Dynamic Loadings ◽  
Point Bend

Stress intensity factors for a three-point bend specimen under dynamic loadings are obtained through the displacement fields using digital image correlation (DIC) method. The dynamic loads are generated with a drop weight to impact the specimen while the crack remains stationary in this study. It shows that the stress intensity factor oscillates as a function of time. The experimental details and the comparison with theoretical solutions are presented.

Asymmetric Four-Point Crack Specimen

1999 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 207-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Y. He ◽  
J. W. Hutchinson
Keyword(s):  
Stress Intensity ◽  
Stress Intensity Factors ◽  
Edge Crack ◽  
Shear Force ◽  
Finite Geometry ◽  
Basic Solution ◽  
Bend Specimen ◽  
Intensity Factors ◽  
Moment Distribution ◽  
Point Bend

Accurate results for the stress intensity factors for the asymmetric four-point bend specimen with an edge crack are presented. A basic solution for an infinitely long specimen loaded by a constant shear force and a linear moment distribution provides the reference on which the finite geometry solution is based. [S0021-8936(00)03601-1]

Stress Intensity Factors for Circular-Arc Cracks in Plates

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. J. Shim ◽  
S. Tang ◽  
T. J. Kim ◽  
N. S. Huh
Keyword(s):  
Stress Intensity Factor ◽  
Stress Intensity ◽  
Intensity Factor ◽  
Stress Intensity Factors ◽  
Crack Model ◽  
Surface Cracks ◽  
Intensity Factors ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Crack Face ◽  
Circular Arc

Stress intensity factor solutions are readily available for flaws found in pipe to pipe welds or shell to shell welds (i.e., circumferential/axial crack in cylinder). In some situations, flaws can be detected in locations where an appropriate crack model is not readily available. For instance, there are no practical stress intensity factor solutions for circular-arc cracks which can form in circular welds (e.g., nozzle to vessel shell welds and storage cask closure welds). In this paper, stress intensity factors for circular-arc cracks in finite plates were calculated using finite element analysis. As a first step, stress intensity factors for circular-arc through-wall crack under uniform tension and crack face pressure were calculated. These results were compared with the analytical solutions which showed reasonable agreement. Then, stress intensity factors were calculated for circular-arc semi-elliptical surface cracks under the lateral and crack face pressure loading conditions. Lastly, to investigate the applicability of straight crack solutions for circular-arc cracks, stress intensity factors for circular-arc and straight cracks (both through-wall and surface cracks) were compared.

Propose of Simplified Stress Intensity Factor Equation for SCC Extension of the Pipe Welds

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mayumi Ochi ◽  
Kiminobu Hojo ◽  
Itaru Muroya ◽  
Kazuo Ogawa
Keyword(s):  
Stress Intensity Factor ◽  
Stress Intensity ◽  
Intensity Factor ◽  
Stress Intensity Factors ◽  
Crack Extension ◽  
Crack Depth ◽  
Alloy 600 ◽  
Intensity Factors ◽  
Axial Crack ◽  
Extension Analysis

Alloy 600 weld joints have potential for primary water stress corrosion cracks (PWSCC). At the present time it has been understood that PWSCC generates and propagates in the Alloy 600 base metal and the Alloy 600 weld metal and there has been no observation of cracking the stainless and the low alloy steel. For the life time evaluation of the pipes or components the crack extension analysis is required. To perform the axial crack extension analysis the stress intensity database or estimation equation corresponding to the extension crack shape is needed. From the PWSCC extension nature mentioned above, stress intensity factors of the conventional handbooks are not suitable because most of them assume a semi-elliptical crack and the maximum aspect ratio crack depth/crack half length is one (The evaluation in this paper had been performed before API 579-1/ASME FFS was published). Normally, with the advance of crack extension in the thickness direction at the weld joint, the crack aspect ratio exceeds one and the K-value of the conventional handbook can not be applied. Even if those equations are applied, the result would be overestimated. In this paper, considering characteristics of PWSCC’s extension behavior in the welding material, the axial crack was modeled in the FE model as a rectangular shape and the stress intensity factors at the deepest point were calculated with change of crack depth. From the database of the stress intensity factors, the simplified equation of stress intensity factor with parameter of radius/thickness and thickness/weld width was proposed.

Consideration of Reduction in Stiffness due to Cracking and the Impact on Standard Stress Intensity Factor Solutions

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel M. Blanks
Keyword(s):  
Stress Intensity Factor ◽  
Stress Intensity ◽  
Intensity Factor ◽  
Stress Intensity Factors ◽  
Nozzle Geometry ◽  
Intensity Factors ◽  
Factor Solution ◽  
Small Component ◽  
Embedded Crack ◽  
The Impact

An API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 Failure Assessment Diagram based Fitness-for-Service assessment was carried out on an embedded crack-like flaw found in a nozzle to shell weld in a pressure vessel. Stress intensity factors were initially calculated by utilizing stress results from a Finite Element Analysis (FEA) of an uncracked configuration, with the standard embedded crack stress intensity factor solution given in API 579-1/ASME FFS-1. Due to the complex nozzle geometry and flaw size, a second analysis was carried out, incorporating a crack into the FEA model, to calculate the stress intensity factors and evaluate if the standard solution could be applied to this geometry. A large difference in the resulting stress intensity factors was observed, with those calculated by the FEA with the crack incorporated into the model to be twice as high as those calculated by the standard solutions, indicating the standard embedded crack stress intensity factor solution may be non-conservative in this case. An investigation was carried out involving a number of studies to determine the cause of the difference. Beginning with an elliptical shaped embedded crack in a plate, the stress intensity factor calculated with an idealized 3D crack mesh agreed with the API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 solution. Examining other crack locations, and crack shapes, such as a constant depth embedded crack, revealed how the solution began to differ. The greatest difference was found when considering a crack mesh with a small component height (i.e. the distance measured perpendicular from the crack face to the top of the mesh). A close agreement was then found between the stress intensity factors calculated in the nozzle model and an idealized crack mesh with component heights representative of the true geometry. This revealed that reduced structural stiffness is a key factor in the calculation of the stress intensity factors for this geometry, due to the close proximity of the embedded crack to the inner surface of the nozzle. It was found that this reduction is potentially significant even with relatively small crack sizes. This paper details the investigation, and aims to provide the reader with an awareness of situations when the standard stress intensity factor solutions may no longer be valid, and offers general recommendations to consider when calculating stress intensity factors in these situations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document