4.6 Article

Analysis of fatigue failure mode transition in load-carrying fillet-welded connections

期刊

MARINE STRUCTURES
卷 46, 期 -, 页码 102-126

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.marstruc.2016.01.001

关键词

Load-carrying fillet welds; Traction stresses; Finite element; Weld root cracking; Weld toe cracking; Fatigue failure

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea Grant - Korea government (MEST) through GCRC-SOP at University of Michigan [2-1]
  2. Korea Institute of Industrial Technology(KITECH) [2-1] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In load-carrying fillet welded connections, two distinct fatigue failure modes are possible depending upon fillet weld leg size and loading conditions. One is weld toe cracking through base plate thickness and the other is through weld metal, often referred to as weld root cracking. Based on a recent comprehensive fatigue testing program in support of construction of lightweight ship structures, this paper examines a number of stress based fatigue parameters that can be used to formulate an effective criterion for determining failure mode transition from weld root to weld toe. A closed form solution has been developed for analytically determining the weld throat critical plane on which a traction stress based fatigue parameter attains its maximum and can be compared with that corresponding to weld toe cracking. It is found that both an effective weld throat stress based criterion by combining normal and shear traction stresses and an equivalent effective stress based criterion based on the master S-N curve formulation can be used for the determination of the minimum fillet weld leg size beyond which weld toe fatigue failure dominates. The proposed fillet weld sizing criteria are then validated using a large amount of fatigue test data on load-carrying cruciform fillet welded specimens. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据