4.6 Article

Effect of Welding Defects on Fatigue Properties of SWA490BW Steel Cruciform Welded Joints

Journal

MATERIALS
Volume 16, Issue 13, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma16134751

Keywords

welded joints; defect; fatigue limit; stress concentration factor

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In order to test the fatigue properties of welded defective joints in high-speed rail bogies, SMA490BW steel cruciform welded joints with artificial defects were used. Fatigue tests were conducted on the specimens and the fatigue fracture morphology was studied using scanning electron microscopy. The stress distribution and concentration factor of cruciform welded joints with defects were calculated using ABAQUS (version 2022) finite element software. The results showed that the fatigue limits of the 1mm and 2.4mm defect specimens were approximately 57.2 and 53.75 Mpa, respectively. Furthermore, the stress concentration factor of the 1mm and 2.4mm defects increased by 98% and 198% compared to the no-defect case.
Welding is prone to several defects. To test the fatigue properties of the welded defective joints of high-speed rail bogies, SMA490BW steel cruciform welded joints were employed with artificial defects treatment. Consequently, fatigue tests were conducted on the specimens. Fatigue fracture morphology was studied via scanning electron microscopy. The ABAQUS (version 2022) finite element software was used to calculate the stress distribution and concentration factor of cruciform welded joints with defects. The results show that the fatigue limits of 1 and 2.4 mm defect specimens were approximately 57.2 and 53.75 Mpa, respectively. Furthermore, the stress concentration factor of no, 1 mm, and 2.4 mm defects were 2.246, 4.441, and 6.684, respectively, indicating that the stress concentration factor of 1 and 2.4 mm defects increased by 98 and 198%, respectively, with respect to the no-defect case.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available