Comparison of <i>J</i> Integral Assessments for Cracked Plates and Pipes
The purpose of this article is to compare two predictive methods of <i>J</i> integral assessments for center-cracked plates, single-edge cracked plates and double-edge cracked plates produced from X52 and X70 steels, and a longitudinally cracked pipe produced from X70 steel. The two meth...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
MDPI AG
2021-08-01
|
Series: | Materials |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/15/4324 |
id |
doaj-7ba3e4435ecf4f75a9186ae895300d53 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-7ba3e4435ecf4f75a9186ae895300d532021-08-06T15:28:05ZengMDPI AGMaterials1996-19442021-08-01144324432410.3390/ma14154324Comparison of <i>J</i> Integral Assessments for Cracked Plates and PipesĽubomír Gajdoš0Martin Šperl1Jan Bayer2Jiří Kuželka3Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics of the Czech Academy of Sciences, v. v. i. Prosecká 809/76, 190 00 Prague, Czech RepublicInstitute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics of the Czech Academy of Sciences, v. v. i. Prosecká 809/76, 190 00 Prague, Czech RepublicInstitute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics of the Czech Academy of Sciences, v. v. i. Prosecká 809/76, 190 00 Prague, Czech RepublicFaculty of Mechanical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Technická 4, 166 07 Prague, Czech RepublicThe purpose of this article is to compare two predictive methods of <i>J</i> integral assessments for center-cracked plates, single-edge cracked plates and double-edge cracked plates produced from X52 and X70 steels, and a longitudinally cracked pipe produced from X70 steel. The two methods examined are: the GSM method and the <i>J<sub>s</sub></i> procedure of the French RCC-MR construction code, designated here as the FC method. The accuracy of <i>J</i> integral predictions by these methods is visualized by comparing the results obtained with the “reference” values calculated by the EPRI method. The main results showed that both methods yielded similar <i>J</i> integral values, although in most cases, the GSM predictions were slightly more conservative than the FC predictions. In comparison with the “reference” values of the <i>J</i> integral, both methods provided conservative results for most crack configurations, although the estimates for cracks of a relative length smaller than 1/8 were not found to be so conservative. The prediction of burst pressures for external longitudinal semielliptical part-through cracks in X70 steel pipe showed that the magnitudes of predicted burst pressures came very close to each other, and were conservative compared to FEM (finite element method) calculations and experimentally determined burst pressures.https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/15/4324crackstress intensity factor<i>J</i> integralstress concentrationstrain energy densityRamberg–Osgood relation |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Ľubomír Gajdoš Martin Šperl Jan Bayer Jiří Kuželka |
spellingShingle |
Ľubomír Gajdoš Martin Šperl Jan Bayer Jiří Kuželka Comparison of <i>J</i> Integral Assessments for Cracked Plates and Pipes Materials crack stress intensity factor <i>J</i> integral stress concentration strain energy density Ramberg–Osgood relation |
author_facet |
Ľubomír Gajdoš Martin Šperl Jan Bayer Jiří Kuželka |
author_sort |
Ľubomír Gajdoš |
title |
Comparison of <i>J</i> Integral Assessments for Cracked Plates and Pipes |
title_short |
Comparison of <i>J</i> Integral Assessments for Cracked Plates and Pipes |
title_full |
Comparison of <i>J</i> Integral Assessments for Cracked Plates and Pipes |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of <i>J</i> Integral Assessments for Cracked Plates and Pipes |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of <i>J</i> Integral Assessments for Cracked Plates and Pipes |
title_sort |
comparison of <i>j</i> integral assessments for cracked plates and pipes |
publisher |
MDPI AG |
series |
Materials |
issn |
1996-1944 |
publishDate |
2021-08-01 |
description |
The purpose of this article is to compare two predictive methods of <i>J</i> integral assessments for center-cracked plates, single-edge cracked plates and double-edge cracked plates produced from X52 and X70 steels, and a longitudinally cracked pipe produced from X70 steel. The two methods examined are: the GSM method and the <i>J<sub>s</sub></i> procedure of the French RCC-MR construction code, designated here as the FC method. The accuracy of <i>J</i> integral predictions by these methods is visualized by comparing the results obtained with the “reference” values calculated by the EPRI method. The main results showed that both methods yielded similar <i>J</i> integral values, although in most cases, the GSM predictions were slightly more conservative than the FC predictions. In comparison with the “reference” values of the <i>J</i> integral, both methods provided conservative results for most crack configurations, although the estimates for cracks of a relative length smaller than 1/8 were not found to be so conservative. The prediction of burst pressures for external longitudinal semielliptical part-through cracks in X70 steel pipe showed that the magnitudes of predicted burst pressures came very close to each other, and were conservative compared to FEM (finite element method) calculations and experimentally determined burst pressures. |
topic |
crack stress intensity factor <i>J</i> integral stress concentration strain energy density Ramberg–Osgood relation |
url |
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/15/4324 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT lubomirgajdos comparisonofijiintegralassessmentsforcrackedplatesandpipes AT martinsperl comparisonofijiintegralassessmentsforcrackedplatesandpipes AT janbayer comparisonofijiintegralassessmentsforcrackedplatesandpipes AT jirikuzelka comparisonofijiintegralassessmentsforcrackedplatesandpipes |
_version_ |
1721217934970322944 |