PSI - Issue 14

9

Sanjeev M Kavale et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 14 (2019) 584–596 Sanjeev M. Kavale, Krishnaraja G Kodancha, Nagaraj Ekbote / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

592

(A)

1.65 (B)

 = 0.20  = 0.25  = 0.30  = 0.35  = 0.40  = 0.45

 = 0.20  = 0.25  = 0.30  = 0.35  = 0.40  = 0.45

1.72

1.60

1.68

K I(max) /  (  a) 1/2

1.55

1.64

K I(max) /  (  a) 1/2

SENB a/W=0.50

CT a/W=0.50

1.60

1.50

1.56

1.45

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

B/W

B/W

Fig. 12 Variation of K 1(max) / σ√π a for (A) SENB and (B) CT specimen for different B/W , various Poisson's ratio and a/W =0.50

1.1 (A)

0.6 (B)

 = 0.20  = 0.25  = 0.30  = 0.35  = 0.40  = 0.45

 = 0.20  = 0.25  = 0.30  = 0.35  = 0.40  = 0.45

CT a/W=0.50

SENB a/W=0.50

1.0

0.5

0.9

0.4

0.3 T 11(max) / 

0.8 T 11(max) / 

0.7

0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

B/W

B/W

Fig. 13 Variation of T 11(max) / σ for (A) SENB and (B) CT specimen for different B/W , various Poisson's ratio and a/W =0.50

0.0 (A)

0.0 (B)

SENB a/W=0.50

CT a/W=0.50

-0.5

-0.5

-1.0

-1.0

-1.5

-1.5

T 33(max) / 

T 33(max) / 

 = 0.20  = 0.25  = 0.30  = 0.35  = 0.40  = 0.45

 = 0.20  = 0.25  = 0.30  = 0.35  = 0.40  = 0.45

-2.0

-2.0

-2.5

-2.5

-3.0

-3.0

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

B/W

B/W

Fig. 14 Variation of T 33(max) / σ for (A) SENB and (B) CT specimen for different B/W , various Poisson's ratio and a/W =0.50

It is observed from the graphs that, for CT specimen, the magnitude of normalized stress intensity factor is reducing as B/W increases for higher Poisson’s ratio. But for lesser Poisson’s ratio the magnitude of normalized stress intensity factor is almost constant. However, for SENB specimen, the magnitude of normalized stress intensity