Issue 54

A. Kumar K. et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 54 (2020) 36-55; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.54.03

coefficients at node number 1275 (Fig. 19 (b)) it is evident that it is false indication of damage. Fig. 20(a) and Fig. 20(b) shows the variation of intensity factor and damage index respectively for different spatial sampling. For a particular spatial sampling the value of damage index and intensity factor increases with increase in damage severity.

(b)

(a)

(a) w/d=1

(b) w/d=1/2

(d)

(c)

(c) w/d=1/4

(d) w/d=1/10

(e)

(e) w/d=1/50 Figure 18: Effect of reduced spatial sampling on damage localization for c/h 0.5

52