Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Background
Background
(b)
(b)
(c)
Equivalent SS Method
t1/t=0.1
a/t
a/t
Conclusions:
Mkn approaches unity as crack size a/t approaches 0.1 i.e., a/t=0.1 (short
crack correction factor) Thus a/t=0.1 can be taken as a characteristic
parameter beyond which the notch effect is negligible
The difference between edge crack and elliptical crack solutions are not
significant.
Equivalent SS Method
Summary
The Structural Stress Method developed at Battelle is
mesh insensitive that removes the uncertainty in the
calculation of structural stress for weld joint fatigue
assessment
References
[1]. BS PD 5500: , BSI Standards, London, 2000.
[2]. European Standard for Unfired Pressure Vessels, EN 13445: 2002, BS EN 13445:2002, BSI, London, 2002
[3]. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Rules for construction of pressure vessels, Division 2Alternative rules, ASME, 2003.
[4]. Carl E. Jaske, FSRF for WPVP, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, AUGUST 2000, Vol. 122, 297-304
[5]. S.J.Maddox, Review of fatigue assessment procedures, Int. J. of Fatigue, Vol. 25, 12, 2003, 1359-1378.
[6]. Maddox S J: 'Fatigue aspects of pressure vessel design, Spence J and Tooth A S, E & F N Spon, London, 1994.
[7]. Harrison J D and Maddox S J: 'A critical examination of rules for the design of pressure vessels subject to fatigue
loading' in Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on 'Pressure Vessel Technology', Mech E, London, 1980.
[8]. Taylor N (Ed): 'Current practices for design against fatigue in pressure equipment', EPERC Bulletin No.6, European
Commission, NL-1755ZG, Petten, The Netherlands, 2001.
[9]. Dong, P., 2005, A Robust Structural Stress Method for Fatigue Analysis of Offshore/Marine Structures, Journal of
Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering , Vol. 127, pp. 68-74.
[10]. Dong, P., 2001, A Structural Stress Definition and Numerical Implementation for Fatigue Evaluation of Welded
Joints, Int. J. Fatigue, 23/10, pp. 865876.
[11]. Dong, P., Hong, J. K, Osage, D., and Prager, M., Assessment of ASMEs FSRF Rules for Pipe and Vessel Welds
Using A New Structural Stress Method, Welding In the World, Vol. 47, No. 1/2, 2003, pp. 3143.
[12] Dong, P., Hong, J. K., Osage, D., Prager, M., 2002, Master S-N Curve Method for Fatigue Evaluation of Welded
Components, WRC Bulletin, No. 474, August.
[13]. Lankford, J. , Fatigue of Eng Mater and Structures 5 (1982), pp233-248
[14]. R. Craig McClung, et al, Behavior of Small Fatigue Cracks, ASME, Vol. 19, Fatigue & Fracture, P153
[15]. Fricke W., 2001, Recommended Hot-Spot Analysis Procedure for Structural Details of FPSOs and Ships Based on
Round-Robin FE Analysis, ISOPE Proceedings, Stavanger, Norway, June.
Background
ANSYS, Verity, Fe-Safe Weld Assessment Procedure
ANSYS Preprocessing
Verity Analysis
Fe-Safe Analysis
ANSYS Results
Comparison of Analysis Results with the Test Results
Conclusions
Background
Resistance welded suction fitting
Three failures in the suction fitting weld
during reliability testing
Crack initiated at the weld toe (9 o clock)
and propagated through the shell.
Failure due to reverse bending fatigue.
Calibration
Quantify loading
relative to the test
for FEA
- Solution
Reliability Testing
Ansys Post processing
Verity result validation
and comparison
Suction Fitting
Shell
Weld Line
ANSYS Results
Maximum Stress
Equivalent Stress
eq
Verity Procedures
Conclusions