PSI - Issue 19

Jan Papuga et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 19 (2019) 405–414 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

413

9

in the Mises variant above all. The output thus shows the best range of errors among all TCD and RSG variants, while keeping the maximum over-conservativeness reasonably low. The range of errors is getting close to the best variants of the Buch method, which is anyhow better balanced in its mean value.

Table 8. Results of the RSG approaches.

Calculation method

Stieler

IABG

Eichlseder

FKM

Eq. stress Mises

PS1 51.7 -11.1 62.8 27.0 14.5

Mises 29.8 -68.3 98.1

PS1 34.6 -44.4 79.0

Mises 27.0 -74.4 101.4 -11.5

PS1 32.0 -49.2 81.2 -1.4 19.8

Mises

PS1 46.2 19.2 27.0 34.5

48.2 -27.4 75.5 20.5 17.1

42.3 10.2 32.0 29.5

Maximum  FI [%] Minimum  FI [%] Range of  FI [%] Average  FI [%] St. dev. of  FI [%]

-7.2 22.8

2.4

19.0

23.8

7.0

5.8

Fig. 3. Prediction results at different lifetimes for each notch type for selected computational configurations.