excellent agreement and there is nothing in the data
which would indicate any serious deficiency in the
model.
In the case of radial load on the nozzle, prior
tests on Penn State Models "D," "E" and "R"21
•
22
indicated stresses on the transverse axis 3-5 times
those on the longitudinal axis. In the case of
Model "C-1," the ratio is 5.7 for ()'~' and 8.7 for
() x· The qualitative effect is therefore the same,
but the difference is seemingly accentuated in the
thin shell model.
In the case of mom
excellent agreement and there is nothing in the data
which would indicate any serious deficiency in the
model.
In the case of radial load on the nozzle, prior
tests on Penn State Models "D," "E" and "R"21
•
22
indicated stresses on the transverse axis 3-5 times
those on the longitudinal axis. In the case of
Model "C-1," the ratio is 5.7 for ()'~' and 8.7 for
() x· The qualitative effect is therefore the same,
but the difference is seemingly accentuated in the
thin shell model.
In the case of mom
excellent agreement and there is nothing in the data
which would indicate any serious deficiency in the
model.
In the case of radial load on the nozzle, prior
tests on Penn State Models "D," "E" and "R"21
•
22
indicated stresses on the transverse axis 3-5 times
those on the longitudinal axis. In the case of
Model "C-1," the ratio is 5.7 for ()'~' and 8.7 for
() x· The qualitative effect is therefore the same,
but the difference is seemingly accentuated in the
thin shell model.
In the case of mom
of the validity of the data must rest in considerable
measure on the internal consistency of the data itself. In this regard, a detailed comparison of the stresses in the fillet on the axes of symmetry for the three external loading conditions is contained in Table A-5 for those cases where the stress was large enough to be significant (greater than 2.0 ksi). In each case, the value listed is an average of readings obtained in the positive and negative loading directions. For all such cases, agreement between one axis of symmetry and its counterpart 180 o opposite is within the range of 3 to 12%. Considering variations in fillet radius and difficulty in exact placement of the gages, this isexcellent agreement and there is nothing in the data which would indicate any serious deficiency in the model. In the case of radial load on the nozzle, prior tests on Penn State Models "D," "E" and "R"21 • 22 indicated stresses on the transverse axis 3-5 times those on the longitudinal axis. In the case of Model "C-1," the ratio is 5.7 for ()'~' and 8.7 for () x· The qualitative effect is therefore the same,
but the difference is seemingly accentuated in the
thin shell model. In the case of moment loading, results from Penn State Model "R" gave maximum stresses under a transverse moment approximately 2-2.5 times those due to an equal longitudinal moment. Calculations based on Bijlaard's curves predicted a similar difference, although the absolute values of the calculated stresses were somewhat lower than the measured ones in both cases. For equivalent moments on Model "C-1," the maximum stresses due to a transverse moment are 4-5 times as great as those due to a longitudinal moment, with the maximum stress. being located 60-70° off the longitudinal axis in the latter case; for the stress directly on the long·itudinal axis, the ratios are 12.1 and 5.0 for 0''~' and O'x, respectively. The comparative effects noted in the Penn State and liT models are therefore qualitatively similar, with the added fac-