Advertisement

Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention

, Volume 13, Issue 5, pp 619–623 | Cite as

Residual Stresses and Stress Intensity Factor Calculations in T-Welded Joints

  • A. M. Al-Mukhtar
Technical Article---Peer-Reviewed

Abstract

In welded joint, the residual stresses effect can be considered using the residual stress intensity factor (K res). In this study, K res is calculated using the analytic weight function method (WFM) and the polynomial distribution of residual stresses (σ res). The different residual stress distributions have been used analytically. It is to be emphasized that the current approach is little investigated. This is because the weight function has already been developed to calculate K for a crack that had already existed, and hence to calculate the stress distribution and stress intensity factor over the crack face. Therefore, the current approach calculates K res with σ res consideration for the crack which initiates and propagates until failure. The validity to use the proposed weight function has been shown. The results of K res have been compared with those obtained from FEM.

Keywords

Fatigue crack growth Residual stress intensity factor SINTAP Superposition Weight function 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thankfully appreciate the support received from the Technische Universität Bergakademie Freiberg, Faculty of Materials Science and Technology, and Faculty of Geosciences, Geoengineering and Mining. The fruitful discussions with Prof. Gregory Glinka, University of Waterloo, Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering, Canada, are gratefully acknowledged. The support from the Institute of International Education (IIE), USA is also gratefully appreciated.

References

  1. 1.
    Z. Barsoum, I. Barsoum, Eng. Fail. Anal. 16(1), 449–467 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    G. Servetti, X. Zhang, Eng. Fract. Mech. 76(11), 1589–1602 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    C.D.M. Liljedahl, J. Brouard, O. Zanellato, J. Lin, M.L. Tan, S. Ganguly, P.E. Irving, M.E. Fitzpatrick, X. Zhang, L. Edwards, Int. J. Fatigue 31(6), 1081–1088 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Okamoto, H. Nakamura, J. Press. Vessel Technol. 112(3), 199–203 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Hobbacher, Recommendations for Fatigue Design of Welded Joints and Components, IIW Doc., No XIII-1965r14-03/XV-1127r14-03. (International Institute of Welding, 2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    British Standards Institution, Guidance on Methods for the Acceptance of Flaws in Structure, PD 6493, BS 7910, App. J, (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R6, Revision 4, Assessment of the Integrity of Structures Containing Defects. (British Energy Generation Ltd (BEQL), Barnwood, 2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J.Y. Barthelemy, Structural Integrity Assessment Procedures for European Industry—SINTAP. Compendium of residual stress profile. Final report BRITE-EURAM SINTAP, BE95-1426 Task 4, Institut de Soudure, 1999Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. Lee, S. Lee, J. Lee, R. Wimpory, K.M. Nikbin, J. ASTM Int. (JAI) 4(1), 1–10 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    H.-Y. Lee, F.R. Biglari, R. Wimpory, K.M. Nikbin, Eng. Fract. Mech. 73(13), 1755–1771 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    N.P. O’Dowd, K.M. Nikbin, H.-Y. Lee, R.C. Wimpory, F.R. Biglari, J. Press. Vessel Technol. Trans. ASME 126, 432–437 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    X. Niu, G. Glinka, Int. J. Fract. 35(1), 3–20 (1987)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    K. Guo, R. Bell, X. Wang, Int. J. Fatigue 29, 481–488 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    M.R. Andersen, Fatigue Crack Initiation and Growth in Ship Structures (Department of Architectures and Offshore Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, 1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ASM International 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Geosciences, Geoengineering and MiningTechnische Universität Bergakademie FreibergFreibergGermany
  2. 2.Al-Khwarizmi College of Engineering, University of Baghdad BaghdadIraq

Personalised recommendations