Research article Special Issues

A combination rule for multiple surface cracks based on fatigue crack growth life

  • Received: 26 September 2016 Accepted: 21 November 2016 Published: 28 November 2016
  • A plate under cyclic loading, containing two coplanar surface flaws with both identical and dissimilar sizes, is considered in the present study. By conducting detailed step-by-step finite element analyses, the conservatism contained in different combination rules for multiple coplanar flaws provided by fitness-for-service codes (ASME, BS7910, API579 and GB/T19624) have been quantitatively assessed for the fatigue failure mode. The findings show that the re-characterization guideline provided by ASME and BS7910 may cause non-conservative estimations when two crack sizes are similar, whereas API579 and GB/T19624 lead to excessively pessimistic predictions for almost all the cases. Based on the fatigue crack growth life, we suggest a new combination rule and conclude that it always yields a reasonable estimation with necessary conservatism, for various initial crack depths, material constants and relative sizes of two cracks.

    Citation: Jian-Feng Wen, Yong Zhan, Shan-Tung Tu, Fu-Zhen Xuan. A combination rule for multiple surface cracks based on fatigue crack growth life[J]. AIMS Materials Science, 2016, 3(4): 1649-1664. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2016.4.1649

    Related Papers:

  • A plate under cyclic loading, containing two coplanar surface flaws with both identical and dissimilar sizes, is considered in the present study. By conducting detailed step-by-step finite element analyses, the conservatism contained in different combination rules for multiple coplanar flaws provided by fitness-for-service codes (ASME, BS7910, API579 and GB/T19624) have been quantitatively assessed for the fatigue failure mode. The findings show that the re-characterization guideline provided by ASME and BS7910 may cause non-conservative estimations when two crack sizes are similar, whereas API579 and GB/T19624 lead to excessively pessimistic predictions for almost all the cases. Based on the fatigue crack growth life, we suggest a new combination rule and conclude that it always yields a reasonable estimation with necessary conservatism, for various initial crack depths, material constants and relative sizes of two cracks.


    加载中
    [1] Zheng Z, Yuan S, Sun T, et al. (2015) Fractographic study of fatigue cracks in a steel car wheel. Eng Fail Anal 47: 199–207.
    [2] Lei X, Niu J, Zhang J, et al. (2014) Failure analysis of weld cracking in a thick-walled 2.25Cr-1Mo steel pressure vessel. J Mater Eng Perform 23: 1231–1239.
    [3] Chávez J, Valencia J, Jaramillo G, et al. (2015) Failure analysis of a Pelton impeller. Eng Fail Anal 48: 297–307. doi: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2014.08.012
    [4] Hasegawa K, Miyazaki K, Saito K (2011) Plastic collapse loads for flat plates with dissimilar Non-aligned through-wall cracks. ASME 2011 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Baltimore, USA 475–479.
    [5] Hasegawa K, Miyazaki K, Kanno S (2001) Interaction criteria for multiple flaws on the basis of stress intensity factors. ASME 2001 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Atlanta, USA 23–30.
    [6] Bezensek B, Sharples J, Hadley I, et al. (2011) The History of BS 7910 Flaw Interaction Criteria. ASME 2011 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Baltimore, USA 837–843.
    [7] Bezensek B, Hancock JW (2004) The re-characterisation of complex defects: Part I: Fatigue and ductile tearing. Eng Fract Mech 71: 981–1000. doi: 10.1016/S0013-7944(03)00155-3
    [8] Iida K, Ando K, Hirata T (1980) An evaluation technique for fatigue life of multiple surface cracks (Part 1): A problem of multilple series surface cracks. J Soc Nav Archit Jpn 148: 284–293.
    [9] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI: Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components. (2005) New York, USA: American Society of Mechanical Engineering.
    [10] BS7910: Guidance to Methods for Assessing the Acceptability of Flaws in Metallic Structures. (2013) London: British Standards Institution.
    [11] API 579-1/ASME FFS-1. Fitness-for-Service, Section 9. (2007) American Petroleum Institute.
    [12] GB/T 19624. Safety Assessment for In-Service Pressure Vessels Containing Defects. (2004) Beijing: Chinese Standards.
    [13] Hasegawa K, Bezensek B, Scarth DA (2016) Global Harmonization of Flaw Modeling/Characterization. Global Applications of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code, ASME Press.
    [14] Soboyejo W, Knott J, Walsh M, et al. (1990) Fatigue crack propagation of coplanar semi-elliptical cracks in pure bending. Eng Fract Mech 37: 323–340. doi: 10.1016/0013-7944(90)90044-H
    [15] Tu ST, Dai SH (1994) An engineering assessment of fatigue crack growth of irregularly oriented multiple cracks. Fatigue Fract Eng M 17: 1235–1246. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2695.1994.tb01412.x
    [16] Kamaya M (2008) Growth evaluation of multiple interacting surface cracks. Part I: Experiments and simulation of coalesced crack. Eng Fract Mech 75: 1336–1349.
    [17] Leek T, Howard I (1994) Rules for the assessment of interacting surface cracks under mode I load. Int J Pres Ves Pip 60: 323–339. doi: 10.1016/0308-0161(94)90131-7
    [18] Carpinteri A, Brighenti R, Vantadori S (2004) A numerical analysis on the interaction of twin coplanar flaws. Eng Fract Mech 71: 485–499. doi: 10.1016/S0013-7944(03)00040-7
    [19] Nishioka T, Zhou G, Fujimoto T (2011) Verification of the combination rules of multiple flaws in ASME B & PV Code Section XI: a case study of two adjacent surface planar flaws. J Press Vess Tech 133: 021101. doi: 10.1115/1.4001917
    [20] Coules H (2016) Stress intensity interaction between dissimilar semi-elliptical surface cracks. Int J Pres Ves Pip 146: 55–64. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpvp.2016.07.011
    [21] Lin XB, Smith RA (1997) Fatigue growth analysis of interacting and coalescing surface defects. Int J Fract 85: 283–299. doi: 10.1023/A:1007476729339
    [22] ZENCRACK. Version 7.8. (2013) London: Zentech International Limited.
    [23] ABAQUS. Version 6.12. (2012) Providence: Dassault Systèmes.
    [24] Wen JF, Tu ST, Xuan FZ (2013) Numerical analyses of interaction behavior of multiple surface cracks using a modified creep-damage model and fracture mechanics approach. ASME 2013 Pressure Vessels & Piping Conference, Paris, France.
    [25] Newman JC, Raju IS (1981) An empirical stress-intensity factor equation for the surface crack. Eng Fract Mech 15: 185–192. doi: 10.1016/0013-7944(81)90116-8
    [26] Tu ST (1988) A Study of Effect of Irregular Crack Like Defects on the Engineering Structural Integrit [Ph.D Thesis]. Nanjing Institute of Chemical Technology, Nanjing, China.
    [27] Anderson TL (2005) Fracture mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications, Boca Raton: CRC Press.
    [28] Kamaya M, Sassa T, Kikuchi M (2013) Crack growth prediction method considering interaction between multiple cracks. Assessment procedure for multiple surface cracks of dissimilar size. Nippon Kikai Gakkai Ronbunshu, A Hen 79: 1382–1395.
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2016 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(1664) PDF downloads(973) Cited by(1)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(14)  /  Tables(2)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog