PSI - Issue 60

Thondamon V et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 60 (2024) 484–493 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

492

9

load from TES method are on an average about 45% more than the limit load obtained from Chattopadhyay and Tomar (2006) expressions and they are about 30% more as compared to the limit load estimated by using Hong et al. (2010) expressions. Some more studies are to be performed to confirm the applicability of the expressions proposed by both Chattopadhyay and Tomar (2006) and Hong et al. (2010) for the case of elbows with circumferential through-wall crack at intrados with internal pressure.

Table 5. Summary of limit load obtained for healthy elbows.

Healthy Elbows

ID

EMML

TES

Limit load (kN)

Chattopadhyay and Tomar (2006)

Chang-Sik and Kim (2006)

kN

kN

Hong et al. (2010)

With Internal Pressure Without Internal Pressure

124 (+12.7%)

101 (-8.2%) 113 (-3.4%)

106 (-3.6%) 113 (-3.4%)

PRELHO-8

350

110

113 (-3.4%)

ELHO-8

297

117

2653 (-)

2651 (-)

2651 (-)

ELHO-24-4

1905

-

Table 6. Summary of limit load obtained for elbows with circumferential through-wall crack at intrados.

Elbows with Circumferential Through-Wall Crack at Intrados

ID

EMML

TES

Limit load (kN)

Chattopadhyay and Tomar (2006)

kN

kN

Hong et al. (2010)

63 (-31.5%) 28 (-47.2%) 52 (-49.5%) 1370 (-11.6%)

75* (-18.5%) 39* (-26.4%) 61* (-40.8%) 1354 (-11.6%)

PRELTWCIN 8-1

111

92

With Internal Pressure

PRELTWCIN 8-3

59

53

HPRELTWCIN 8-1

121

103

Without Internal Pressure

ELTWCIN-24-3

1579

1549

* Both weakening factors due to internal pressure and through-wall crack are considered

5. Summary and conclusions In the present study, limit load for two types of elbows, viz., healthy elbow and elbow having circumferential through-wall notch at intrados, with and without internal pressure subjected to in-plane bending moment is determined. Three healthy elbows (one with internal pressure and two without internal pressure) and four elbows with circumferential through-wall notch at intrados (three with internal pressure and one without internal pressure) were considered for the study. Below are the observations from the study. • For healthy elbows with and without internal pressure, limit load from all three proposed expressions are in good agreement with the limit load from TES method. Hence, any of these expressions can be used for evaluation of limit load. • For elbows with circumferential through-wall crack at intrados without internal pressure, limit load from both Chattopadhyay and Tomar (2006) and Hong et al. (2010) are similar and slightly less compared to limit load from TES method. Hence, any of the two expressions can be used for evaluation of limit load. • For elbows with circumferential through-wall crack at intrados with internal pressure, limit load from Chattopadhyay and Tomar (2006) and Hong et al. (2010) are very low compared to limit load from TES method. Hence, further studies are to be performed to understand the variation in limit load as compared to the experimental results.