PSI - Issue 79

Santi Marchetta et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 79 (2026) 224–232

229

Fig. 4. Experimental setup scheme.

Fig. 5. Experimental data: a) Steel joint (Taylor, (2002)); b) Titanium joint (Corigliano & Palomba, (2025)).

3. Finite element model The simulations were carried out by a parametric 2-D finite element model developed in Ansys APDL (Fig. 6). The same model was employed to evaluate both the hotspot stresses and the strain energy density in the two investigated joints. As illustrated, the model is divided into three regions: the red-framed area was created to favor a smooth mesh transition between the mapped SED control region (black-framed) and the rest of the joint which is instead auto-meshed. For the auto-meshed region, a general element sizing equal to 0.4· t (where t is the horizontal plate thickness) was adopted, to satisfy the meshing requirements prescribed for hotspot stress evaluation. The system was modelled under plain strain condition adopting quadrilateral 4-node elements of the type PLANE182. Moreover, symmetry was applied to reduce time and computational costs.