4.5 Article

Mechanical properties and constitutive models of butt-welds in Q345GJ thick steel plates

Journal

JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTIONAL STEEL RESEARCH
Volume 213, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2023.108321

Keywords

Thick steel plates; Butt welds; GJ steel; Material property; Constitutive model

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study focuses on the mechanical properties of butt welds in thick GJ steel plates and analyzes the differences between the weld specimens and the base metals in terms of static and cyclic mechanical properties.
GJ steel is a high-performance steel manufactured in China, and its thick plates are widely used in building structures. The first companion study examined the material properties of the thick GJ steel plates (t >= 60 mm). This study focuses on the mechanical properties of butt welds in thick GJ steel plates (t >= 60 mm). Monotonic and cyclic tests were conducted on butt-weld specimens made of 60-mm and 100-mm thick Q345GJ steel plates in the longitudinal and transverse directions. In addition, the layered specimens obtained from five different thickness locations were tested. Based on the cyclic test results, the Chaboche constitutive parameters were calibrated and verified via the finite element analysis (FEA). Moreover, the differences in the static and cyclic mechanical properties of the base metal and butt welds were analysed. Compared with the base metal, the static tensile strength and hysteretic energy dissipation under the same cyclic loading protocol were better in the weld specimens; however, their ductility was significantly lower. Furthermore, the distribution of the mechanical properties along the thickness direction was more uniform in the weld specimens. Moreover, the weld specimens had higher yield surface reduction ratios. However, their initial and final yield surface sizes were larger than those of the base metals.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available