0
RESEARCH PAPERS

# Limit Load Analysis of Cracked Components Using the Reference Volume Method

[+] Author and Article Information

Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL, Canadaradibi@engr.mun.ca

Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL, Canada

1

Corresponding author.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 129(3), 391-399 (Jul 03, 2006) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2749288 History: Received October 21, 2005; Revised July 03, 2006

## Abstract

Cracks and flaws occur in mechanical components and structures, and can lead to catastrophic failures. Therefore, integrity assessment of components with defects is carried out. This paper describes the Elastic Modulus Adjustment Procedures (EMAP) employed herein to determine the limit load of components with cracks or crack-like flaw. On the basis of linear elastic Finite Element Analysis (FEA), by specifying spatial variations in the elastic modulus, numerous sets of statically admissible and kinematically admissible distributions can be generated, to obtain lower and upper bounds limit loads. Due to the expected local plastic collapse, the reference volume concept is applied to identify the kinematically active and dead zones in the component. The Reference Volume Method is shown to yield a more accurate prediction of local limit loads. The limit load values are then compared with results obtained from inelastic FEA. The procedures are applied to a practical component with crack in order to verify their effectiveness in analyzing crack geometries. The analysis is then directed to geometries containing multiple cracks and three-dimensional defect in pressurized components.

<>
Copyright © 2007 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

## Figures

Figure 1

Relaxation locus for pressure components with a crack

Figure 2

Compact tension (CT) specimen: reference stress and uniaxial stress-strain model

Figure 3

A body with elastic-perfectly plastic material

Figure 4

Total and reference volume

Figure 5

Variation of m20 with elastic iterations

Figure 6

Variation of m20 with volume ratio

Figure 7

Geometry and dimensions for (a) compact tension specimen; (b) plate with multiple cracks; (c) axial semielliptical (inner) surface crack (3D)

Figure 8

Variation of limit load multipliers for compact tension (CT) specimen; direct EMAP

Figure 9

Variation of G20 for compact tension (CT) specimen; direct EMAP

Figure 10

Variation of m20 with elastic iterations for compact tension (CT) specimen: Reference Volume Approach (procedure 1)

Figure 11

Variation of m20 versus V¯η for compact tension (CT) specimen: Reference Volume Approach (procedure 2)

Figure 12

Variation of limit load multipliers for plate with multiple cracks: Direct EMAP

Figure 13

Variation of G20 for the plate with multiple cracks: Direct EMAP

Figure 14

Variation of m20 with elastic iterations for plate with multiple cracks: Reference Volume Approach (procedure 1)

Figure 15

Variation of m20 versus V¯η for the plate with multiple cracks: Reference Volume Approach (procedure 2)

Figure 16

Typical finite element mesh: (a) one quarter model; (b) local crack detail

Figure 17

Variation of limit load multipliers for axial semielliptical surface crack: Direct EMAP

Figure 18

Variation of G20 for an axial semielliptical surface crack: Direct EMAP

Figure 19

Variation of m20 with elastic iterations for an axial semielliptical surface crack: Reference Volume Approach (procedure 1)

Figure 20

Variation of m20 versus V¯η for axial semielliptical surface crack: Reference Volume Approach (procedure 2)

## 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 Proceedings Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections