PSI - Issue 77

Victor Rizov et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 77 (2026) 397–404 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2026) 000–000

403

7

lft rght H H / ratio (curve 1 – at /

0.15 2 = a l , curve 2 – at /

0.30 2 = a l and curve 3 – at

Fig. 4. The normalized integral J vs.

/ 0.45 2 = a l )

Fig. 5. The normalized integral J vs. l l / 1 ratio (curve 1 – at / 1.4 = h b , curve 2 – at / 1.6 = h b and curve 3 – at / 1.8 = h b )

The effect of this ratio is illustrated by the plots in Fig. 3. It is obvious that growth of lft rght L L / ratio induces rise of the integral J (Fig. 3). The influence of the distribution of the coefficient of thermal expansion along the beam length on the integral J is also analyzed (for this purpose, lft rght α α / ratio is varied). The plots in Fig. 3 show that the integral J grows when lft rght α α / ratio increases. Figure 4 illustrates the change of the integral J due to variation of lft rght H H / and 2 / a l ratios. Inspection of the plots in Fig. 4 reveals that increase of these ratios results in growth of the integral J . The beam structure geometry is characterized by l l / 1 and h b / ratios. The effect of these ratios on the integral