Contents Local (Structural) Stress Based Fatigue Design

Chitoshi Miki
Department of Civil Engineering Tokyo Institute of Technology

Brief Review of Nominal Stress Based Fatigue Design Structural Stress Based Fatigue Design -Fatigue Assessment of Welded JointsJoints>Cope Hole Joints >High Strength Steel Steels Stress Analysis Method for Root Cracks -Effective Notch StressStress-

Retrofit Engineering for Urban Infrastructures, Lecture #6

Fatigue Design
Nominal Stress Based Fatigue Design (Review)
Butt Welded Joints: JSSC-Category D Non-Load Carrying Cruciform Joints: JSSC-Category E Load Carrying Cruciform Joints: JSSC-Category H Joint Types Strength Category

Fatigue Design
Structural Stress Based Fatigue Design Structural Hot-spot Stress Approach
Define the fatigue strengths directly By the local stress at crack initiation points

Stress Concentration

Stress Distribution

Structural Stress (Hot Spot Stress) approach

Importance of The Structural Hot-Spot Stress Approach HotThe Structural Hot-Spot Stress Approach is Applicable to Complicated Stress Conditions due to complicated geometry due to structural discontinuities

Local Stresses control the fatigue phenomenon in any types of joints. The Types of Joints dont affect the Fatigue Strengths Defined by Structural Hot-Spot Stress Approach

due to complicated plate deformation

Complicated Geometry of Joints

Structural Discontinuities

Influential Factors Weld Bead Sizes, Angle, Finishing, Plate Thickness, Symmetry, Complicated Stress Transferring

Complicated Plate Deformation

For Example, In case of Steel Orthotropic Deck Bridges

Hot Spots
2 Types: a and b

Axle Load

FEM Analysis Result

Definition of The Structural Hot-Spot Stress Hot-

Dependency of Structural Stress on the Angle (1)

2

HotSpot = 1
< 45

Dependency of Structural Stress on the Angle (2)

2
normal

Definition of The Structural Hot-Spot Stress Hot-

HotSpot = normal
> 45

The Estimation Method of The Structural Hot-Spot Stress by Measuring Strain

Hot Spot S-N Curves

Linear Extrapolation

Hot Spot S-N Curves

Hot Spot Stresses in Complex Welded Structures

Types of Weld Toes

Type a) : On the Plate Surface at the End of an Attachment Type b) : At the Plate Edge at the End of an Attachment Type c) : Along the Weld of an Attachment

The Estimation Method of The Structural Hot-Spot Stress by FEM Analysis

FEM Modeling for Structural Hot-Spot Stress Evaluation(1)

Solid Elements

Extrapolation points At Nodes

FEM Modeling for Structural Hot-Spot Stress Evaluation(2)

Shell Elements

Modeling of Offsets in Shell Models

Doubling Plates Extrapolation points

Hopper Corner

Round Robin Study for Hopper Corner Model

Recommended Techniques for Modeling of Welds

Shell Elements

Method I: Inclined Shell Elements

Method II: Thickness Changes

International Institute of Welding (IIW)

Fatigue Assessment of Cope Hole Details in Steel Bridges

Fatigue Test Results

FEM Analysis Results

R=35

FEM Analysis Results

R=35 (Tension)

Cope Hole Located 250mm away from the Loading Point

R=45

R=35 (Compression)

Cope Hole Located directly below the Loading Point

Definition of Hot Spot Stress

Influence of Shear Force (Specimen 1)

Stress Distribution (FEM)

Comparison between Analyzed and Estimated SCF Values

S-N Diagram Arranged on Hot Spot Stress Range

Fatigue Assessment of Welded Joints made of High Strength Steels

Crack Length: 10mm

Crack Length: 20mm Out-of-Plane Gussets Cruciform Joints Longitudinal Joints

Fatigue Test Data -Out-of-Plane Gusset JointsEffects of Strength of Steels 900MPa Class Steel JIS SM570

Fatigue Test Data -Out-of-Plane Gusset Joints-

Joint Specimens

Girder Specimens

Stress Distribution around a Gusset Plate (FEM Results)

Joint Specimens

A Proposed Definition of Hot Spot Stress

SYM Uniform Uni-Axial Loading Girder Specimens

Gusset SYM

Principal Stress Distribution around the Gussets

Joint Specimens

Principal Stress Distribution around the Gussets

Girder Specimens

Location of Maximum Principal Stress Stress Distribution

4 Point Bending Tests Pure Bending Shear Bending Crack Initiated from the toe located in the front

Dependent on the Location of the Gussets Shear Bending

3.115 1.829 1.784 3.110 2.245 1.704 1.667 2.263 1.876 1.682 1.645 1.879 1.781 1.675 1.639 1.775 1.720 1.670 1.644 1.746 1.769 1.675 1.648 1.809 1.692 1.667 1.651 1.735 1.681 1.658 1.658 1.679 1.990 1.698 1.666 2.097 1.723 1.670 1.653 1.777 1.697 1.665 1.665 1.697 2.564 1.793 1.755 2.730 1.856 1.687 1.667 2.010 1.749 1.676 1.682 1.748 2.261 1.753 1.725 2.513 1.691 1.706 1.824 1.840

Change of Stress With Increase of the Ratio Pure Bending

H=200

Between Principal Stress and Nominal Stress

H=158

H=91

H=50

A:X=500 B:X=300 A:X=1300 B:X=1100 A:X=-350 B:X=-550 A:X=900 B:X=700

The Target Cracks of Structural Hot-Spot Stress Approach

A: Cracks Initiated from the Weld Toe
B B A

Stress Evaluation by the Effective Notch Stress

Limited to the thickness t >= 5mm

Structural Stress Approach Can be Applied

B: Cracks Initiated from the Roots Structural Stress Approach Cannot be Applied Different Approach is Needed If the Toe is Finished, the radius = 2mm

An Example of Application of the Effective Notch Stress Beam-to-Column ConnectionsBeam- toConnectionsBeam Element

Detailed Solid Models

No. of Nodes: 294966 No. of Elements: 191382

Load
5500 2500

Analysis Code Code Min Element Size Size Number of Nodes Nodes Number of Element Element
79

ABAQUS 11.5mm (T/2) 91,278 90,200

4750

Fixed
170

10690

2500

111

FEM Mesh Full Scaled Structures

The Analysis Result

150
Region of Delta zone Top of the notch
Stress (MPa)

100
Weld toe

50

Column

0 0

20

40

60

80

100

60mm

Beam

distance from the edge (mm)

Distant Location