PSI - Issue 42

M. Yakovlev et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 42 (2022) 1619–1625 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

1624

6

The figure 5 shows the comparison between the specimen geometry-dependent SIF functions obtained numerically and from Murakami's handbook (1987). It should be noted that the FEM results and the Murakami’s handbook (1987) have a dependence. With an increase in the ratio b/t, the difference of functions increases, and with a decrease in the ratio b/a, the difference of functions also increases.

Fig. 5. Difference between functions F s from FEM analysis and Handbook data.

Thus, the specimen geometry-dependent SIF functions of numerical calculations are described with an accuracy of 5% by the following equation:

   

   

2

4

,

(15)

b       t

b       t

, b b a t

  

  

F M M M gf f = + +

A

−

1

2

3

s

w



where the functions M i , g, f φ , f w coincide with the forms (10-16), respectively. The function A is determined by the equation for b/t = 0.1 – 0.7:

2

1 a   = + +     2 b a b c c

(16)

A c

3

2

b     −     t b

b

4.54378975141023

1.2644545639562 0.0604485641748174 +

c

=

1

t

2

b

9.21304794670081 + 2. −

71870216520896 0.197637761875477 −

c

=

2       − t b

2

t

b

4351617

4.97249451561611

1.58906828210819 0.12799346 +

c

=

t    

3

t

The presented SIF equations are convenient for engineering estimates of SIF when using the specimen geometry proposed by the authors (2022).