PSI - Issue 38

11

P.C. Ilie et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2021) 000 – 000

Paul Catalin Ilie et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 38 (2022) 271–282

281

Fig. 11. Results overlay 4F02-cr4 configuration [25] (SimModeler Crack prediction in red).

4. Conclusion Verification of the 3D FEA based procedure was performed using a two-dimensional analytical model implemented in MATLAB with three different types of elliptical cracks (embedded, surface and corner) under remote tensile loading conditions. The analytical model results were found to be in very good agreement with the 3D FEA numerical method, showing similar fatigue lives and planar crack front evolution. Two experimental datasets available in the literature were reproduced in 3D multiple flaw crack propagation simulations to address modeling validation requirements. The out of plane crack path for all five cracks in two modeling configurations are in good agreement with experimental measurements. Given the complexity of the five simultaneous propagating cracks, the predicted remaining useful life captures quite accurately the experimental measurements. The 3D FEA based technique is an efficient and accurate method to calculate crack propagation fatigue lives and crack paths for simple geometries and component level CAD models. [1]. Grandt, A.F., Fundamentals of Structural Integrity Damage Tolerant Design and Non-destructive Evaluation. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA. p.482, 494, 2004. [2]. Goranson, Ulf G., Damage Tolerance Facts and Fiction. 17th Symposium of the International Committee on Aeronautical Fatigue, Stockholm, Sweden, 1993. [3]. Richard, H. A., & Sander, M., Fatigue Crack Growth, 2016, Berlin, Springer [4]. Branco R., Antunes F.V, Costa, J.D.M., A review on 3D-FE adaptive remeshing techniques for crack growth modelling, Enginering Fracture Mechanics, vol. 141, pp. 170-195, 2015. [5]. Glinka G., G. Shen, Universal features of weight functions for cracks in Mode I, Engineering Fracture Mechanics, vol. 40(6), pp.1135 1146, 1991. [6]. Tang L., Ince A., Zheng J., Numerical modeling of residual stresses and fatigue damage assessment of ultrasonic impact treated 304L stainless steel welded joints, Engineering Failure Analysis, vol.108, pp.104277, 2020. [7]. Newman., J.C., Raju, I.S., Stress-Intensity Factor Equations for Cracks in Three-Dimensional Finite Bodies Subjected to Tension and Bending Loads, NASA TM 85793, 1984. [8]. Raju, I.S., Newman, J.C., Stress Intensity Factors for Corner Cracks in Rectangular Bars, Fracture Mechanics: Nineteenth Symposium. T.A. Cruse (Ed.), 1988, ASTM STP 969, Philadelphia, pp.43-55. [9]. ASME section VIII Div. 2 & Div. 3. International Code for Boiler and Pressure Vessel Design, 2007. [10]. API 579/ASME FFS, second ed. Fitness-For-Service, 2007. [11]. BS-7910:2013+A1:2015. Guide to methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures. British Standards International; 2015. [12]. Loghin, A., Life Prediction Modeling Capabilities for FE Applications, CAASE18, Cleveland, OH, 2018. References