0
Expert View

Recharacterization of Subsurface Flaw to Surface Flaw Based on Equivalent Fatigue Crack Growth Rate

[+] Author and Article Information
Valery Lacroix

Mem. ASME
Tractebel Engineering,
Avenue Ariane 7,
Brussels 1200, Belgium
e-mail: valery.lacroix@gdfsuez.com

Yinsheng Li

Mem. ASME
Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA),
Tokai-mura, Naka-gun,
Ibaraki-ken 319-1195, Japan
e-mail: li.yinsheng @jaea.go.jp

Bohumir Strnadel

Center of Advanced Innovation Technologies,
VSB-Technical University of Ostrava,
17. Listopadu 15, Poruba,
Ostrava 70800, Czech Republic
e-mail: bohumir.strnadel@vsb.cz

Kunio Hasegawa

Fellow ASME
Center of Advanced Innovation Technologies,
VSB-Technical University of Ostrava,
17. Listopadu 15, Poruba,
Ostrava 70800, Czech Republic
e-mail: kunioh@kzh.biglobe.ne.jp

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received April 21, 2015; final manuscript received September 28, 2015; published online November 19, 2015. Assoc. Editor: David L. Rudland.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 138(2), 024701 (Nov 19, 2015) (6 pages) Paper No: PVT-15-1073; doi: 10.1115/1.4031723 History: Received April 21, 2015; Revised September 28, 2015

A subsurface flaw located near a component surface is transformed to a surface flaw in accordance with a flaw-to-surface proximity rule. The recharacterization process from subsurface to surface flaw is adopted in all fitness-for-service (FFS) codes. However, the criteria of the recharacterizations are different among the FFS codes. In addition, the proximity factors in the rules are generally defined by constant values, irrespective of flaw aspect ratios. This paper describes the stress intensity factor interaction between the subsurface flaw and component free surface and proposes a proximity factor from the point of view of fatigue crack growth rates.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Fracture surface of flat plate specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Mesh at cross section for centered subsurface flaw in flat plate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Transformation of a subsurface flaw (flaw A) near component free surface and a similar subsurface flaw (flaw B) in the center of a plate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Beach marks to determine proximity factor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Proximity factor Y ( = S/a) obtained by experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Stress intensity factor interaction for subsurface flaws

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Ratio of fatigue crack growth rates for subsurface flaws near free surface and in the center of the plate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Distance from free surface under equivalent stress intensity factor interaction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Proximity factor under equivalent stress intensity factor interaction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Proposal of proximity factor Y

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