PSI - Issue 33

3

Aprianur Fajri et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 33 (2021) 19–26 Fajri et.al / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

21

(a)

(b)

Fig. 1. Alexander L. Kielland: (a) fatigue failure position on clamp D-6, indicated in red; (b) macro-sections of crack initiation (France, 2019).

3. The CAE approach to predicting fatigue life Testing fatigue characteristics on structures directly using experimental methods has complicated procedures with lengthy research. It is necessary to conduct numerical simulations first before creating a test model to reduce development time and development cost (Ertas et al., 2014). Computer-Aided Engineering (CAE) based numerical simulation methods have been used, including Finite Element Method (Alshoaibi et al., 2021; Ismail et al., 2016), Extended FEM (Chang, 2015), regular and full spectral method (Ozguc, 2020; Zhang et al., 2018), standard and Extended Isogeometric Analysis (XIGA) for fracture mechanic approach (Yadav et al., 2020), etc. Compared to other methods, FEM is the most frequently used because it has a simple algorithm. This method can clearly show the stress strain distribution, and it is the best numerical simulation tool to solve the failure mechanic problems (Kahoul et al., 2019; Sedmak, 2018).

Fig. 2. Fatigue approach using Computer-Aided Engineering (CAE).