Analytical Round Robin for Elastic-Plastic Analysis of ... Analytical Round Robin for...

download Analytical Round Robin for Elastic-Plastic Analysis of ... Analytical Round Robin for Elastic-Plastic

of 52

  • date post

    16-May-2020
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    0
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Analytical Round Robin for Elastic-Plastic Analysis of ... Analytical Round Robin for...

  • March 2017

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration IS02 George C. Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama 35812

    NASA/TM—2017–218233

    Analytical Round Robin for Elastic-Plastic Analysis of Surface Cracked Plates, Phase II Results P.A. Allen and D.N. Wells Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20170004487 2020-05-16T13:11:17+00:00Z

  • The NASA STI Program…in Profile

    Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the advancement of aeronautics and space science. The NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI) Program Office plays a key part in helping NASA maintain this important role.

    The NASA STI Program Office is operated by Langley Research Center, the lead center for NASA’s scientific and technical information. The NASA STI Program Office provides access to the NASA STI Database, the largest collection of aeronautical and space science STI in the world. The Program Office is also NASA’s institutional mechanism for disseminating the results of its research and development activities. These results are published by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which includes the following report types:

    • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of completed research or a major significant phase of research that present the results of NASA programs and include extensive data or theoretical analysis. Includes compilations of significant scientific and technical data and information deemed to be of continuing reference value. NASA’s counterpart of peer- reviewed formal professional papers but has less stringent limitations on manuscript length and extent of graphic presentations.

    • TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific and technical findings that are preliminary or of specialized interest, e.g., quick release reports, working papers, and bibliographies that contain minimal annotation. Does not contain extensive analysis.

    • CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and technical findings by NASA-sponsored contractors and grantees.

    • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected papers from scientific and technical conferences, symposia, seminars, or other meetings sponsored or cosponsored by NASA.

    • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, technical, or historical information from NASA programs, projects, and mission, often concerned with subjects having substantial public interest.

    • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English-language translations of foreign

    scientific and technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission.

    Specialized services that complement the STI Program Office’s diverse offerings include creating custom thesauri, building customized databases, organizing and publishing research results…even providing videos.

    For more information about the NASA STI Program Office, see the following:

    • Access the NASA STI program home page at

    • E-mail your question via the Internet to

    • Phone the NASA STI Help Desk at 757 –864–9658

    • Write to: NASA STI Information Desk Mail Stop 148 NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA 23681–2199, USA

  • i

    NASA/TM—2017–218233

    Analytical Round Robin for Elastic-Plastic Analysis of Surface Cracked Plates, Phase II Results P.A. Allen and D.N. Wells Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama

    March 2017

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration

    Marshall Space Flight Center • Huntsville, Alabama 35812

  • ii

    Available from:

    NASA STI Information Desk Mail Stop 148

    NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA 23681–2199, USA

    757–864–9658

    This report is also available in electronic form at

    Acknowledgments

    The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the ASTM Committee on Fatigue and Fracture (E08). Clearly, the most important part of any round robin study is the group of participants graciously lending their time and effort to the undertaking. We would like to sincerely thank each of them: Steven Altstadt at Stress Engineering Services, Jason Bely at Alcoa, Enrico Lucon at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Francisco Martin and Ryan Sherman at Purdue University, Dawn Phillips at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Greg Thorwald at Quest Integrity Group, Igor Varfolomeev at the Fraunhofer-Institut fuer Werkstoffmechanik IWM (Germany), and Michael Windisch at MT Aerospace AG (Germany). We greatly appreciate their efforts in helping us move the surface crack test standard forward.

    https://www2.sti.nasa.gov/login/wt

  • iii

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1

    1.1 Motivation for the Interlaboratory Study ..................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope and Objectives for the Interlaboratory Study ...................................................... 1

    2. PROBLEM STATEMENT ................................................................................................. 4

    3. PARTICIPANT OVERVIEW ............................................................................................. 6

    4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ......................................................................................... 7

    4.1 Tying Analysis to Experiment ....................................................................................... 8 4.2 Fracture Mechanics Analysis Results ............................................................................ 11 4.3 Comparison of Finite Element Modeling and the Tool for Analysis of Surface Cracks Results .............................................................................................................. 21

    5. PARTICIPANT COMMENTS ........................................................................................... 23

    6. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................ 24

    APPENDIX A—PHASE II PROBLEM STATEMENT ......................................................... 25

    APPENDIX B—ESTIMATION OF THE CRACK EXTENSION INITIATION ANGLE FOR SURFACE CRACKS WHEN NOT DISCERNIBLE FROM THE FRACTURE SURFACE ........................................................................................... 29

    B.1 Technical Background .................................................................................................. 29 B.2 Experimental Evaluations ............................................................................................ 32 B.3 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 35

    REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 36

  • iv

    LIST OF FIGURES

    1. Surface crack test specimen configuration ................................................................. 5

    2. ILS specimen configured for testing .......................................................................... 7

    3. ILS specimen fracture surface ................................................................................... 8

    4. Experimental force versus CMOD response .............................................................. 9

    5. Force versus CMOD response for all ILS participants .............................................. 9

    6. Cross section through the crack plane illustrating the characteristic lengths rf a and rf b ..................................................................................................... 12

    7. J-integral versus f at the critical CMOD as reported by all participants ................... 13

    8. J-integral versus f at the critical CMOD ................................................................... 13

    9. Figure A5.2 from ASTM E2899 illustrating the critical angle evaluation .................. 15

    10. Illustration of the critical angle values for all ILS participants plotted on a sketch of the crack front .................................................................................... 16

    11. Illustration of the critical angle values for all ILS participants plotted on the test specimen fracture surface .............................................................................. 17

    12. J-integral versus CMOD ........................................................................................... 18

    13. Closer view of the range of J-integral values at the critical CMOD .......................... 18

    14. Lab-1 TASC assessment of crack front deformation conditions ................................ 20

    15. Figure 8 from ASTM E2899 illustrating the crack front deformation conditions and test regime assessment ....................................................................... 21

    16. Definition of fi and the characterization of location of maximum crack tearing ...... 29

    17. Relationship between T/sys and Q ............................................................................. 31

    18. Performance of fi prediction based on location of Jp versus equation (6) ................. 32

  • v

    LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)

    19. Performance of fi prediction for D6AC bend tests ....................................................