PSI - Issue 52

A.D. Cummings et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 52 (2024) 762–784 A. Cummings / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2023) 000–000

779

18

Fig. 12. Failure assessment diagram of Base internal radius

Table 7. Base internal radius embedded flaw assessment P m P b W B Flawsize

c mat

K mat

T-stress

K

K I

K r

L r

[MPa.m 0 . 5 ]

[MPa.m 0 . 5 ]

[MPa.m 0 . 5 ]

[MPa]

[MPa]

[mm]

[mm]

(a x 2c) [mm]

[MPa]

101

277

1000 1000 1000 1000

118 118 118 118

2x 7

33.6 33.6 33.6 33.6

N / A N / A N / A

N / A N / A N / A 52.6

19.9 -7.3 34.8 34.8

0.59 0.40

-5409

6519

5x25 5x25 5 x25

-ve

N / A

101 101

277 277

1.01 0.41 0.66 0.41

-460.5

to the content of Mo, Cr and Al in its composition (see Table 7.4 of BS7910 (2019)). However, due to its older designation, there is a degree of uncertainty on the validity of Table 7.4 BS7910 (2019) for this material so both FALs are plotted for comparison. It is evident that the existing inspection criteria are acceptable if allowances for low constraint are taken into account.

7. Discussion

Reserve factors (RFs) have been calculated for both base centre and base internal radius cases considering the e ff ects of constraint. Fig. 12 shows the method for calculating reserve factors from a FAD, the length of lines OA and OB are applied as follows:-

OA OB

RF =

(15)