Estimation of stress intensity factors in tubular K-joints using direct and indirect methods

The stress intensity factors at the deepest point and at the crack ends of a surface crack in a tubular K-joint are calculated by direct and indirect methods. In the direct method, the surface crack is modelled explicitly. An automatic mesh generator is developed to produce a well-graded mesh around...

全面介紹

Saved in:
書目詳細資料
Main Authors: Shao, Y. B., Lie, Seng Tjhen, Li, T.
其他作者: School of Civil and Environmental Engineering
格式: Article
語言:English
出版: 2015
主題:
在線閱讀:https://hdl.handle.net/10356/104453
http://hdl.handle.net/10220/24674
http://www.ascjournal.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=110:vol8no1-2&catid=104&Itemid=552
標簽: 添加標簽
沒有標簽, 成為第一個標記此記錄!
機構: Nanyang Technological University
語言: English
實物特徵
總結:The stress intensity factors at the deepest point and at the crack ends of a surface crack in a tubular K-joint are calculated by direct and indirect methods. In the direct method, the surface crack is modelled explicitly. An automatic mesh generator is developed to produce a well-graded mesh around the crack region. This is achieved by using five types of elements. Thereafter, the stress intensity factors of a surface crack located anywhere along the weld toe at the joint intersection are calculated using the J-integral method. The computed values had been verified by experimental test results. In the indirect method, the stress intensity factors are estimated by the T-butt solutions used in conjunction with the stress concentration factors (SCFs) and degree of bending (DOB) of the uncracked tubular K-joint. In this study, a total of 1024 models, covering a wide range of geometrical parameters and crack shapes, have been selected and analyzed. Both approaches are able to produce a safe estimation of stress intensity factors at the deepest point of the surface crack. However, the indirect method is found to be extremely conservative; it overestimates the stress intensity factor values by as much as 190.4% (β=0.5, γ=30, τ=0.5, a/T=0.1, c/a=5) at the deepest point, and 390.7% (β=0.4, γ=30, τ=0.5, a/T=0.5, c/a=8) at the crack ends of the surface crack respectively