0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Yield Criterion for Thin Perforated Plates With Square Penetration Pattern

[+] Author and Article Information
A. Bhattacharya

Reactor Safety Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai 400 085, India

V. Venkat Raj

Health, Safety and Environment Group, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai 400 085, India

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 126(2), 169-178 (May 05, 2004) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1687383 History: Received October 28, 2002; Revised August 28, 2003; Online May 05, 2004
Copyright © 2004 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

O’Donnell,  W. J., and Porowski,  J., 1973, “Yield Surfaces of Perforated Material,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., pp. 263–270.
Porowski,  J., and O’Donnell,  W. J., 1974, “Effective Plastic Constants for Perforated Materials,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., pp. 234–240.
Litewka,  A., 1980, “Experimental Study of the Effective Yield Surface of Perforated Materials,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 57, pp. 417–425.
Bhattacharya, A., Murli, B., and Kushwaha, H. S., 1991, “Determination of Stress Multipliers for Thin Perforated Plates With Square Array of Holes,” Trans. of SMiRT 11, Vol. B, Tokyo, Japan.
Bhattacharya, A., and Kushwaha, H. S., 1991, “Analysis of Perforated Plates With Square Penetration,” B.A.R.C. Report unpublished report, Reactor Engineering Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Center, India.
Porowski,  J., and O’Donnell,  W. J., 1975, “Plastic Strength of Perforated Plates With Square Penetration Pattern,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., pp. 146–154.
Winnicki,  L., Kwiecinski,  M., and Kleiber,  M., 1977, “Numerical Limit Aanalysis of Perforated Plates,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 11, pp. 553–561.
Konig,  M., 1986, “Yield Surfaces for Perforated Plates,” Res Mechanica, 19 , pp. 61–90.
Murkami,  S., and Konishi,  K., 1982, “An Elastic-Plastic Constitutive Equation for Transversely Isotropic Materials and Its Applications to the Bending of Perforated Circular Plates,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., 24(12), pp. 763–775.
Targowski, R., Lamblin, D., and Guerlemen, G., 1993, “Non-Linear Analysis of Perforated Circular Plates With Square Penetration Pattern,” Proceedings of SMiRT-12, Paper No. F 4/3, pp. 57–61.
Rogalska,  E., Kakol,  W., Guerlement,  G., and Lamblin,  D., 1997, “Limit Load Analysis of Perforated Disks With Square Penetration Pattern,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., pp. 122–126.
Reinhardt,  W. D., 2001, “Yield Criteria for the Elastic-Plastic Design of Tubesheets With Triangular Penetration Pattern,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 123, pp. 118–123.
Hill, R., 1950, The Mathematical Theory of Plasticity, Oxford University Press, U.K.
Bhattacharya,  A., Buragohain,  D. N., and Kakodkar,  A., 1994, “Determination of the Equivalent Properties of Perforated Plates by Numerical Experiment,” International Journal of Engineering Analysis and Design, 1 (2), pp. 241–246.
Bhattacharya,  A., and Venkat Raj,  V., 2003, “Peak Stress Multipliers for Thin Perforated Plates With Square Array of Circular Holes,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 80(6), pp. 379–388.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Rotation of applied stress in equivalent solid material
Grahic Jump Location
Layout for square pentration pattern (3×3) under biaxial loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (Tresca), η=20 percent, pitch direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (Tresca), η=20 percent, diagonal direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (Tresca), η=30 percent, pitch direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (Tresca), η=30 percent, diagonal direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (Tresca), η=50 percent, pitch direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (Tresca), η=50 percent, diagonal direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (von Mises), η=20 percent, pitch direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (von Mises), η=20 percent, diagonal direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (von Mises), η=30 percent, pitch direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (von Mises), η=30 percent, diagonal direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (von Mises), η=50 percent, pitch direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (von Mises), η=50 percent, diagonal direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (von Mises), η=70 percent, pitch direction of loading
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of polynomial yield functions with FEM results (von Mises), η=70 percent, diagonal direction of loading

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In