Evaluation of fracture mechanics parameters for a range of weldment geometries with different mismatch ratios

Zhou, Haoliang; Biglari, F. R.; Davies, Catrin M.; Mehmanparast, Ali; Nikbin, Kamran

doi:10.1016/j.engfracmech.2014.03.006

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(1). Similar observation has been reported by Zhou and co-authors [10]. The estimated η values for various configurations of weld C(T)specimen are given in Table 1.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Xuan and co-authors [8] and Marie & Nedelec [9] have performed FE based analysis for various mismatch factors from 0.25 to 2 and 2.3 respectively. A literature review of η solution for C(T)specimen in tabular form is provided by H. Zhou and co-authors [10]. They have analyzed the influence of mismatch factor, weld height, material hardening exponent and a/W ratio effect on η solution.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Limit load based evaluation of plastic η factor for C(T) specimen with a mismatched weld

Nikhil

Krishnan

Sasikala

et al. 2019

Frattura Ed Integrità Strutturale

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plastic η factor is adopted to account for crack tip plasticity while evaluating the fracture toughness of the materials as per ASTM E1820. It is valid only for homogeneous materials. The plastic η factor for Compact Type (C(T)) geometry with type 316LN stainless steel weld has been evaluated based on elastic-plastic FE analysis. The incremental elastic-plastic material model with various values for strength mismatch ratio (M) i.e. ratio of yield strength of weld metal to that of base metal, from 1.2 to 2.2 have been considered. The weld width (h) parallel to the crack plane is varied from 4 mm to 16 mm. The η values thus obtained are analyzed and the inferences are discussed.

show abstract

“…(1). Similar observation has been reported by Zhou and co-authors [10]. The estimated η values for various configurations of weld C(T)specimen are given in Table 1.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limit load based evaluation of plastic η factor for C(T) specimen with a mismatched weld

Nikhil

Krishnan

Sasikala

et al. 2019

Frattura Ed Integrità Strutturale

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since the hardness level of both HAZs is higher than that of the two BMs, the strengths corresponding to the onset of their plastic deformation may be superior to the ones of the BMs. More detailed investigation of the mechanical heterogeneity across the weld joint can be achieved by introducing a global strength mismatch factor M. This factor is defined as the ratio of the yield strength of the WM to that of the BM [36]. .…”

Section: Mechanical Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Microstructure and mechanical behavior in dissimilar 13Cr/2205 stainless steel welded pipes

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, the structural fatigue life mainly depends on the crack extension in the subcritical extension stage for the common welding structure. The Paris formula is defined based on the linear fracture mechanics at the subcritical stage. Using the Paris formula and considering the uncertainty factors in the process of calculation, the fatigue life expression is given as

T_{f} = \frac{1}{B^{m} normalΩ} true {true\int}_{a_{0}}^{a_{f}} \frac{d a}{C {B_{Y}}^{m} Y^{m} ((), a) {(π a)}^{\frac{m}{2}}}

where a is the crack length, a 0 refers to the initial crack length and a f denotes the critical crack length when fatigue failure occurs.…”

Section: The Structural Life Considering Load Sheddingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the structural fatigue life mainly depends on the crack extension in the subcritical extension stage for the common welding structure. The Paris formula 32 is defined based on the linear fracture mechanics [33][34][35] at the subcritical stage. Using the Paris formula and considering the uncertainty factors in the process of calculation, the fatigue life expression is given as 36…”

Section: Traditional Structural Fatigue Lifementioning

confidence: 99%

Fatigue reliability study on T‐welded component considering load shedding

Liu

Qing

Deng

et al. 2015

Fatigue Fract Eng Mat Struct

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, a coupled reliability method for structural fatigue evaluation considering load shedding is first proposed based on probabilistic fracture mechanics in which the uncertainties of the structural parameters are taken into account. Then, the method is applied to predict the fatigue reliability of the T‐welded structure to the case of considering load shedding or not. The compared results show that by considering the load shedding, the structural fatigue reliability might be improved with less conservativeness. The influence rules of the load‐shedding coefficient on the fatigue failure probability of the T‐welded component are investigated, and some interesting results are obtained. That is, the influences of load‐shedding coefficient on the fatigue failure probability can be divided into three regions, namely the high, medium and low fatigue failure areas. The last area is the most intriguing when we try to design a T‐welded structure. The thickness of T‐welded structure along the crack propagation direction is found to be one of the important design variables for the design of fatigue reliability, in which the low‐fatigue failure zone is used as one of the reliability constraints. The basic design frame of T‐welded structure is established to constrain the fatigue failure probability within the low‐fatigue failure area.

show abstract

Evaluation of fracture mechanics parameters for a range of weldment geometries with different mismatch ratios

Cited by 12 publications

References 27 publications

Limit load based evaluation of plastic η factor for C(T) specimen with a mismatched weld

Limit load based evaluation of plastic η factor for C(T) specimen with a mismatched weld

Microstructure and mechanical behavior in dissimilar 13Cr/2205 stainless steel welded pipes

Fatigue reliability study on T‐welded component considering load shedding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About