Introduction to the Structural Stress Approach (0 Fatigue Analysis of Plate Structures By Erkki Niemi and Gary Marquis Lappeenranta University of Technology P.O, Box 20 FIN-S3851 Lappeenranta, Finland Abstract 1n 201 the Comission Xl of he testo Ista of Welding GT) approved he pablo of ‘scesand taut the sect sess posh owe mals of welded component [1 Tht document Seen i eee apot method fe plaesype welded tactics an provides ion ad CES ine ar of FEA To ese fnigie ie, This cael manuscript sa condened venion of ne potion on he pci ct ieee ese and ied wo oe cate uy sey given, Sie tnd ae de ie quantal defined an proposed SN curves fr ceret wel quai sf Fhe aa es fr oto sess detain oe includ a parte paper inthis presen [2 1. Introduction Structural design eodes for fatigue of welded stractures normally rely on the nominal stress approach in which diferent weld geometries are assigned fatigue strength values bass pamanly on constant amplitude laboratory testing. Weld details ar proupod into classes tet Pave stele fatigue strength. Both Eurocode [3] and ITW [4] rules for example, define 14 weld {hnses that correspond fo the allowable altemating stess range at two million eyes to faire Fatgue strngih of a partcular detail can be estimated by selecting an S-N curve, which ‘ppl represents @ 97.7% survival probability. This nominal sess approach ignores the aeal Gimensional variations of a particular structural detail, which is an obvious drawback. ‘Moreover, the form of welded component is often so complex thatthe determination of the pominal sires is difficult or impossible, This is tre even ifthe finite element analysis (FEA) method is used To overcome some ofthese difficulties linear elastic facture mechanics (LEFM) [4-7] and local stress Based approaches (4, 8-9] have been developed and applied to welded Structures, These methods ae potentally highly accurate even for complex structures, but the Computational effort is significantly greater than forthe nnsnal stress method and has Limited there approaches to a relatively small number of highly safety ential components, LEFM IMathods ave also very sensitive tothe inital erack size chosen and are therefore wsed primarily for components with known flaws Fhe structural stress approach avoids the difficulties associated with applying the ‘nominal sires approach and is computationally much less demanding than either LEFM or Focal stress methods, Structural stess does take into consideration the dimensions and stress (Gaventrating effects ofthe deal at the anticipated crack initiation site, The locel non-Tinear Stress peak caused by the notch atthe weld toe is excluded. The exact geometry of the weld Minar be known a the design stage this notch effect is, therefore, included inthe hot spot $9 Curve determined experimentally. The variation in the local geometry of the weld (oe is the hain season for seater in fatigue tet results. By using the lower bound characteristic SN ave, Yoner bound quality of the weld toe is incorporated into the analysis. single S-N curve Ani asuffices for most forms of structural discontinuity provided the weld toe geometry is aways the ‘An obvious reason for introducing the structural stress approach isthe availability of powerful computers and software, which make detailed FE analyses possible for most design Dfices. However, the approach is also a valuable tool for choosing the locations of stain _ghuges when validating design by field-esting prototype structures, Moreover finite element analyses make it possible to produce parametric formulae in advance for easy estimation of structural stresses at various hotspots. ‘The hot spot or structural stress approach was fist developed for fatigue analysis of Welded tubular joints in offshore structures [10-11]. Corresponding fatigue design rules were Published by the American Petroleum Insitute, the American Welding Society, Bureau Veritas, UK Din, ete. A review of this topic ean be found in [12]. There has been an increasing demand for extension of the approzch to plate-type structures as well The frst general design ‘le to include the structural stress approach was the Buropean pre-standard ENV 199-1-1 [3], This document, however, provided only limited guidance, Later, the TW published new ‘recommendations containing four approaches, including the structural stress approsch [3]. For cetain fields of application, specitie rules are already available, namely for tubular structures {13}, ship bulls [14, 15} and pressure vessels (1). background document was also published focusing on definitions and the determination of stresses used inthe fatigue analysis of welded ‘components (17). Since 1996 Commission XI of the Intemational Institute of Welding (LIW) thas had a working group active in developing guidelines for hot spot stress determination and {in 2001 a designers” puide was approved for publication [1]. ‘This paper is intended 10 provide an introduction to the structural stress methods as efined by the Commission XIM of the MW. Details of implementing this approach ia FEA is sgiven further a companion paper i this volume [2] 2. Determination of Structural Hot Spot Stresses 24 Scope ‘The structural stress approach applies to welded joints where the fluctusting principal Stress acts predominantly perpendicular to the weld tor or the ends of a discontinuous longitudinal weld and where the potential fatigue crack wil initiate atthe weld toe or end. For ‘example, the structural stress approach applies to eases ato e showa in Figure L. The approach {snot applicable to cases where the crack will row from the weld ro0t and propagate through the weld throat, cases {) toi) inthis figure. Good design practice aims to avoid this kind of ‘behaviour because the crac isnot visible before it hs propagated through the weld. Moreover, ‘he structural stess approach does not apply to continuous welds subject to longitudinal Yoading, The nominal stess approach [4 is Sufficent for such cases. 4~on dhe. Ho ee. BS 0 . of a Sap =a a) Figure 1 Examples of fatigue crack initiation sites in welded joint, 2.2 Types of structural stress ‘The Hot spot is the ctitcal location at the weld foe where a fatigue crack can be expected to initiate. The hotspot approsch is hased onthe range of the structural stress at che hot spot. Hot spots canbe classified into two types, as shown in Figure 2, For type “a” the weld Telosated on a plate surface (se also Figure |). For type"b" the weld is located on a plate edge. This is also shown in Figure 3. For type "a" hot spots the sirutura stress is highly ‘dependent onthe plate thickness. Ths is not the ease for type "b" hot spe. Figure 2 Examples ofthe two fot spot types, a welded girder: Type "ais located on the surface ofthe lower flange, Type "bi located on the eg of web plate in «scallop. Figure 3 shows various weld details containing Type "b" hot spots a the short weld toe or weld end on the plate edge. tery 15-Figure 3. Plate edge details with Type "B" hot spots, These welds are classified as load- caring, except in eases where L = 100 mim. 23 Type "a" hot spot 23.1 Definition ofthe structural stress ata type "a" hot spot ‘The hot spot is the critical location atthe weld toe where a fatigue crack can be expected to initiate, The hot spot approach is based on the range ofthe structural stress atthe hot spot, also called the "hot spt stress range". Structural stress, 6, is the sum of membrane stres, oy» and shell bending tess, on the surface ofthe member, Figure 4 Os Om + Op +f Figure 4 Illustration ofthe sructural stress atthe stm of membrane and shell bending stresses om the surface ofa member. However, atthe weld toe thee is @ local notch, which leads to @ non-linear stress sistrbution dough the plate thickness, Figure 5, This consists of three parts: the membrane sites, the shell ending siest and the non-linear stress peak, dap -The basic idea of the hot spot approach isto exclude this non-linear stress peak from the structural sires, because the designer eannot know the actual local weld toe geometry in advance. The effet of the notch is Implictly included in the experimentally determined S-N curve. Thus, only the wo linearly Aistributedsiess components are ineluded i the stuctral stress. is sometimes argued thatthe strctural hot spot stress is an arbitrary, ill-defined quantity, which does not actually exist. However, according tthe above definition, itis an ‘unambiguous quantity, atleast for Type "a! hot spots. Provide the actual non-linear stress distribution is known, the membrane and shell bending stress components can be calculated. Often this is not possible; the structural hot spo stress must then be estimated by extrapolation, ner 4 onNotch stress G, = Sm + Te + Ony Complex welded seuctures will ely have a purely uniaxial ses fed, Is therefore important t clearly define the stress components used to determine the strutural stress CCangider the incline weld in biaxial sess field as shown in Figure 6. The structural stess ‘sil depend onthe angle ofthe normal to the weld toe with respect to the principal stress and is Aefined as the larger of [4,17] s) the peincipal ress on the surface, which is acting within +/- 45° ofthe normal to the weld toe (igure 6a), oF +) the normal stress component perpendicular to the weld ioe Figure 6b). For multianal stress fields, hot spot stresses cannot be based on equivalent or von Mises stresses, a) [eral b) ae soxses tere Figure 6 Definition of the stress component used as hot spor stress 2.2.2 Approximate method for experimental determination ofthe structural hot spot stress Figure 7 shows how the stress distribution across plate thickness changes in the vicinity of a Type "a" hot spot Ata distance O.dr from the weld toc, the non-linear component has practeally vanished and the distribution is almost linear. ‘This fact is exploited in the PMtapolavon technique used for approximation ofthe structural hot spt stress as shown in Figs. _n-‘Nonlinear stress peak Total stress Structural stress eas) Figure 7 Variation inthe through-thicknese stress distribution approaching the weld oe. In most type "a hotspots the structural sess and strain inctease almost linearly when ‘approaching the weld te. When the structural hot pot sires is determined using strain gauges, for exampic in fatigue testing or the fleld testing of prototypes, itis sufficient to use linear extrapolation, as illustrated in Figure 8. Two stain gauges, A and B, ae attached (,$¢ and 0? ( fom the weld toe, and the structural strain at the hot spot i¢ determined using. linear extrapolation, These extrapolation points would also be suitable for analysing stresses obtained by fine mesh FEA [I-2]. In field measurements from prototype testing, these extrapolation points give conservative results when compared to those recommended in connection with finite elements of pre-determined size, Structural hot spot stress Nonstinear stress peak Weld toe Strain gauge A ta], Strain gauge B Ws a amar Figure 8 Linear exirapolation tothe weld oe in order to estimate the structural hotspot strain When the strain gauges are locted 0.4 and 1,0 from the weld to, the stractural hot spot strain is given by by 16Te, — 067. o In some cases where the stressed plate is esting ona relatively slff elastic foundation, ©, beam flange just above a web plat, the stess in the vicinity ofa structural diseontinuty increases non-tinearly inthe vicinity ofthe weld to. In such cases linea extapolation would Mer &underestimate the setual stractural hotspot stress. Instead, a quadratic extrapolation method is preferred. For this, atleast the strain gauges, A,B and C are needed. It is recommended that They are attached at locations O41, 0.9 and 1.4 from weld toe. Then the structural hot spot strain is given by by =2528, -2248 +072, ® (Often multiclement strip strain gauges, with fixed distances between the gauges, are used, Thus, their postions may not be located as recommended above. In such circumstances, {tis recommended that sulcient gauges be wsed to enable a curve tobe fitted to the results to establish the required strains by interpolation, If the stress sate is close to uniaxial, the strutural hot spt stress can be approximated using the equation Ou = Bb ® However, ifthe stress state is biaxial, the actual stress may be up to 10% higher than that obtained from Equation (3). If high accuracy is required, the ratio of the longitudinal and transverse strains, Gy, , should be established ftom rosete stain gauges or FEA. The Sructural hot-spot stress, oh, can then be calculated (assuming that this principal stress is transverse fo the weld toe) from the equation @ im Instead of absolute strains, strain ranges, At = ey ~ Syn ae usually measured and substituted inthe above equation, producing the range of suctural hot-spot stress, 4. "Again it is emphasized thatthe extrapolation methods ae approximate and sometimes slightly underestimate the actual strctural hotspot stress. The SN design curves given i this document are based on linear extrapolation according to Equation (1) and are therefore fonservative. On the other hand, underestimation ofthe hot-spot sess atthe design stage is hon-conservative, Ifthe underestimation in both the testing and design phases are of same ‘magnitude, the errors ae balanced. One source of error isthe use of fixed positions forthe ‘measuring points forall types of weld detail. It has been shown that more consistent results Could be achieved ifthe measuring points were dependent onthe type ofthe detail [18], ‘The structural hot spot stress determination woul, of course, be mich more convenient itit coresponded tothe stress ata single point, for example 0.4¢ from the weld toe, However, details of the stress distribution approsching the weld would also be needed to estimate the Sress a the Weld foe. In tis context, there may be scope for producing stress distributions for ‘range of typical weld details by FEA, Alternatively, simply inreasng the assumed loads by sufficient partial safety factor, could make allowance fo exors, 24 Type "b" hot spots |A feature of Type “” hot spots, which contrasts with Type “a, is that the stress Gistrbution approaching the weld toe does not depend on the plate thickness. Thus, Nien —n-«extrapolation limits cannot be established as proportions of plate thickness. A tentative method. for dealing with tis situation was proposed in [10]. This entails the measurement of stains on the plate eige at tree absolute distances from the weld toe, oF from the weld end ifthe weld does not continue around the end ofthe attached plate, namely 4, 8 and 12mm. The structural hot spot stress or szuin is then determined by quadratie extrapolation to the weld toe, as follows: 4.~ So{4 mm) ~3o(8 mim) + o(12 sm) © 2.5 FEA methods In th design phase finite element analysis (FEA) isan ideal too! for determining the structural hot spot sttess, Linear clastic material behaviour is usually assumed, since the stuetual ht spot stress range should not exceed twice the yield strength ofthe material [4] Since the structural tess range, A = Grex Grn is Fequited at east ro loading cases should normally be analysed, gving the maximum and minimum stresses for the detail in ‘question, Either shell or solid clement can be used bu the elemeat mesh should be designed carefully so that extrapolation of the stesses to weld toe can be performed along the most critical extrapolation path. Symmetry ines are not always the correct paths and extra care is needed for complex details such as tabula joints, ‘Tecahedron clements are often available, typically in so-called Computer-Aided Engineering (CAE) software, in connection with a feature for easy mesh generation. Lineat tetrahedron elements are not suitable for structural sizest determination, Only higher order elements in connection with reasonably fine element mesh in the vicinity ofthe hotspot may be used provided the user calibrates the method with suitable benchmark dat. Cat i needed to avoid misinterpreting the finite element results. For example: ‘+ Fest, atypical post-processor displays the nodal stress at the weld toe as an average of two cements located on both sides of the weld toe. It is advisable to pick for post-processing ‘only those elements of interest infront of the weld ‘Second, one must obtain results, which exclude the non-linear stess pesk (in Type “a” joins, Se Figure 7) even in sections close to the weld toe. This isthe case with shell Clements Ia single-layer solid element mesh is used, a linear distribution is obtained with S.node elements or with reduced integration in thickness direction inthe case of 20-node cloments, If multilayer solid element mesh is used, the results include a more oF less accurate approximation of the non-linear sess distribution. The linearly distributed part, ‘or the structural hotspot steas ean then be resolved only by diving the distribution in three parts according to Figure 6, ‘Third, when shell elements ae used the weld geometry is neglected in the modelling. Special care is needed to select appropriate points for stress extrapolation. Frequently, the structural intersection point is chosen because the stress atthe weld toe position might be non-conservative. In the FE analysis of large structures (e.g like ship hulls) tis not practical t0 use a fine clement mesh requitd to accusately resolve the siess Geld in the vicinity ofthe weld toe. A practical, relatively coarse mesh witha typical element size oft x t for Type “a” hotspots can ‘pormally be used, probably in connection with the sub-modeling technique. As the weld toe is ‘modelled as sharp notch, the singularity effect may increase the stresses i the frst element. This compensates the ero in the extrapolation, caused by relatively distant extrapolation, Neer a SFurther explanation on the use of FEA to determine souctral hotspot stresses is given by Fricke (2). 3. Hot Spot S-N curves 3.1 General principles Design SN curves for steel ae expressed as fatigue classes, FAT; and defined via the constanis C and that are given in Table I. These represent lower bound fatigue stent in ‘om oocrosive environmental conditions and in temperatures upto +150°C. The design curves ‘omrespond to 95% survival probability with 75% confidence level, which represents roughly fmeen mines two standard devstions in logartamic seles, These curves Will need 1 be fdjusted for designers who requie failure probabilities other thin those represented by the design curves, “The effect of residual stresses contsned in complex as- welded components is been taken into account. Tn the case of post-weld heat-treated or other components known to contain Tess severe residual stresses, bonus factor may be applied to the fatigue strength according to IW recommendations (4. "The fatigue cass, FAT, is equal to the ftige stength corresponding toa fatigue life of 2x10" eyes, assuming @ slope of m= 3. In the case of constant amplitude loading, the S-N tare shows a fatigue limit, Soy, as sen in Figure 9 [all spplied ses ranges ina variable !umpltede load history remain below the fatigue imi, no fatigue damage is assumed t occur td an infinite fatigue life is expected. Commentary on how to apply the SN curves on ‘arable amplitade lading is given by Niemi (1) ‘The notations used here ae: EAT is fatigue class, ie the fatigue strength at 2x10" eyes do isswessrange; WN ismumber of exces to lure; ‘Aces is constant amplitade fatigue limi, conventionally at Sx10" cycles mis slope exponent inthe upper part of the SN curve, bere Cis dsign value of “fatigue capacity’; Gq is ogaritimic mean value of "que capaci” where C=N-a0" © 3.2 Recommended Hotspot S-N eurves for ste! Table | shows the recommended structural sess SN curves for different weld types end qualities. Also given ae values forth constant amplitude fatigue limit nd thickness reduction factor exponent, fr plate thicknesses exceeding 25mm. It should be noted that load-carrying fillet welds (Figures le and Ih) correspond to FAT 90 while non-load carrying fillet welds (Figure Tb) correspond to FAT 100, End welds representing gussets or brackets welded on plates (Figures le and lj) and fillet welds at cover and collar plats on continuous base plates (Figures 1d and Li) are considered ae non-lond carrying coeesponding to FAT 100, Lap joints for non continuous base plates ae load carving and corresponding to FAT 90,Tit 50 agi a Figure 9 Schematic presentation of derivation of the design S-N curve from a sample of test esl Inthe ease of load-carrying fillet welds a parallel fitigue analysis considering root cracking through the weld droat must also be performed, Nominal sess method, effective notch stress method or erack propagation analysis based on facture mechanics ar suitable pproaches (1). 3.3 Sie effects permet inde tat xg sng of welled jit s sie dpedet This sie ete fs abeato faeces ed stole efits Cometic “fet fen mand doped ont ass pit nt cack goth ecion Ft ‘thas ek pine wit geozieddovntmltesne a oyn aig il ve sone ses feat tesa lately Sr sarc yer Ths esas at cock foveal hres corpse sr dts wom ness. Th aa sie Naan eticealiy of esucs of mg il dc sees wih tee of erie tapi ces cpnd once een weldng posed anger Wig ed seen ecg cmon {eps enrages og reg abe mat be reed bya socal kes eton ctr, Agen ton (For Fype pte ples han arate tng eng cy shy, Dsus te geome sft no edn anyon he mh he pA be pee tne ee gna pd Se aoe ey te femetia ter atet hae dea Howe he mei ted see in Eaton hy wi ed enaplton poms node Sartre Seamer etree adage ps up sac of be ‘ch mes snd sly depend (J o f0 ‘Where isthe thickness reduction factor exponent according 10 Table I f¢=25 mm, t= i Lir>2and t= 0.5L if Lt <2, The values fand Lae defined according o Figure 10. 2Table 1. Hor spot S.N curses for plate up t0 25 mm thick These carves ar vali for perfectly aligned joints. Misalignment efets hove be considered in the applied sess range. Joint Quality | FAT |aoR) 0 RT) bts, Mena | a2 | a | o2 Qa) See. [sememenent | 100 | 26 Jo 5» FE lett | Be) > ann lacie meme. 10 | 74 | 0.3 Son SE et ein Sa) Se pe) SS To £5 200mm —rype-o" sort | et or tl penetration CEA” BEE [accra | 0 | 1 fos Teint | fe octal penetration | 9 | 66 | 0.1 Se BES | cocker rier wests)arwaied | 90 | 66] 0.3 oeFigure 10 Definition of and £ sed in Equation (7). 34 Hot spot S-N curves for aluminium and tubular joints LOW Subcommitee XV-F and tube manufacturers organisation CIDECT has published 1 particular set of ot spot S.N curves for cizcular and rectangular hollow section joint [13]. ‘The thickness effect obtained from tubular joint tests i rather pronounced, and mereover, the slope exponent, m, depends on the thickness, These effects may come fom the fact chat shell bending stresses dominate in the ehord member, Those curves should not be applied to other ‘ypes of sracrre (Only limited number of hotspot fatigue data ses for aluminium welds are available [19-20] Design curves bated on this data canbe found in Appendix 3 of the IW designers side (1). 4. Stress Concentration Factors 4.1 Structural stress concentration factors, K, SSvess concentration factors have been published for many types of structural isconimity, One should be careful when using such stress concentration factors (SCF), beease they might not comply withthe current definition of stuctaral stress. However, valid ‘ress concentration factors, denoted K;, have recently been developed using FEA and presented in fom of parametric formulae Unfortunately, such formulae are available for only 2 elatively few types of deal “The stuctral hot spot sss i calulated using the equation Ou = Ky Cee a) ere Gum isthe modified nominal stress in the aca ofthe hot spot. Modified nominal sess includes the effects of macrogeomety of the component lke large openings, curved bear effec, sear lng, large misilignments ec, which ae not ineluded inthe catalogue of clasiied Aetaisof the conventional design rules fo fatigue analysis oneIn many ease, is reasonable to use separate structural stress concentration factors for xl loading and bending moments of the eonponeat. The structural sess s then calculated {Hom the equation Oi Ky Pane t Ky ams ) wwhete Kos is the structural stess concentration facto i the ease of axial loading, K.> isthe Structural stress concentration factor in the ease bending moment, Ohana is the modified hominal stress caused by axial loading, ad agai the modified nominal ses atthe poin of Interest caused by bending mement, Tn canes of biaxial bending sd the even more complicatd cases as tubular joints with several brace members joined to chotd, the equation can be expanded corespondingly for ach hot spot. Ky values and parametric formulae for several specifi technical leds like ship hulls (14-15, 22}, pressure vessels (23), reinforced openings [24], and tabula joints [28] may be found in the open iterate 442 Effect of misalignments and other macrogeometri features “There is offen a lack of agreement between FEA results and experimental stain reasurements, The difference can usually be atrbuted to the combination of fabrication inaccuracy and welding distortion. Figure 11 shows several typical misalignments that produce ‘Secondary shell bending stresses ina plate loaded by a membrane force. According to ITW (3), ‘he misalignments should be taken into account in diferent ways, depending onthe source of the misalignment 1 Misalignmentsresuling from fabrication inaccuracy and welding distortion, should be taken into account by dividing the fatigue class by a ftctor, Ke. Typical accepable tmisalgnment effects ar already Taken into account in the fatigue classes based on nominal suesses. 2, Designed cecentricites, as shown in Figure 11d, should be taken into account by ‘caeulating the extra shell bending stress. For simplicity, however, te designers guide [1] recommends the later method for all types of misalignment. Thi means that the designer should always assess both the Spe and Imagnitade of expected misalignment and take these info account when calculating stresses Usually itis desirable o ignore Fabrication misalignments and perform the finite clement analysis using a model with ideal geometry. Magnification factors, Kq, can then be used for tstimation ofthe modified nominal sess using the equation o ese un the modified nominal stress, Ks is misalignment magnification factor, Guana the membrane part of the nominal sess, and Ono is the shell bending part ofthe nomial stress Sometimes it may be convenient to conservatively subsite the nominal stress ‘components in Equation (9) withthe ho pot Sess components, ay dO Tt should be noted that in some ees the behaviour of mistligned joints is significantly non-linear, depending on the level of applied sess. In such a ease Equation (9) must be “pplied on both cna td Gn The modified sues range is then the dferenceof the meditied ane‘maximum and minimum stesses. If Ki independent of sess level, Equation (8) can be ‘ively applied to stes anges. Figure 11 Typical misalignments: ) offer misaligament, 6) anc) angular misalignments, eccentric joint ‘would be advisable to include fabrication olerances and recommended Ky values for typical details into design guidance developed for particular suctres, e, cranes and ship alle It should be noted that there may be other macro-geometrc effers, such as lage openings, curved beam effect, ec, shown in Figure 12, which already have increased the ‘membre and sell bending parts ofthe nominal srss, before Equation (2) canbe applied. <_< Flange curing Discontinuity effect ina shell Eocent¥e joint Figure 12. Macrogeometric features which enhance the nominal tress yon 18 SOme cass, ‘sebondary shel bending siresses ae induced. 43 Parametric formulae for Ky (Currently, Ky values are available based mainly on 2-dimensional analyses. Adjacent, ssiffenes affect the Boundary conditions but his aken nto aecount in simpliid mane in the following Tore 4,21, Sample parametie formula ae here given forthe simple cases of axial and angular alignment of plates of equal thickness. The designers” guide [1] ‘includes these and several ater common cases. "Axial misalignment between Mat plates of equal thickness can be computed using the cguation oseb re) Kosta 9) ‘is dependent on restraint, 26 for unvestained ois. For emotely loaded joints assume l= ag La Angular mislignment gnifiation factors fort plates of equal thickness. 4 — (a fxed ends: 32a eer ay 2t fon whee po fe, « cp ismentae ss, 2 iSmotio o eaicy i simed nds: Gy tanb( 8) ge 142 HA 3 2M a s. Example ‘This section provides an example ofa fue case study where the structural hotspot stress method is used. Cracks have been observed in a main girder ofa rslway wagon witha box section welded of suctural steel, The goal of the stdy isto find out reasons ofthe Cracking. More details ofthis ese study ae given by Niemi (1) S.1 Materials and methods 5.14 Desription ofthe structure Figure 13 shows the middle part ofthe wagon frame, The web ofthe box seetion is 4 ‘nm tick, Crossbeams ae fillet welded on the web andthe bottom flange ofthe crossbeam is‘et bar 100 x 6 mm. lsd the box are both diaphragm pats and horizontal lat br sieners corresponding tothe bottom flange of the costbeam. Fatigue eacking has been observed in the web atthe foe ofthe fillet welds welded sround the edge ofthe crossbeam bottom Mange and the Ma er stiffeners 4 on bask macwef, Cite lotion Figure 13 Section ofthe wagon fame showing the Bor spot location ‘The double fillet welds berveen the diphragm and the web have caused significant Aisonion ofthe web, The mide pont ofthe web panel was displaced Sm inwards withthe result thatthe ho spots losted along the inner surface ofthe web. 5.12 Sean gouge measurements “The ot spot stress could not be measured directly because the Bot spot is located inside the box. Stain gnige were attached o both the top and bottom fang ofthe box girder inthe ‘veb plane and one gauge was placed onthe outer srfae ofthe Web becween {Wo transverse beams at the level of the botom flanges, These gauges were used to determine nominal bending sess ofthe stractre inthe vicinity ofthe hot spot. A rainflow analysis ofthe stress history eoresponding toa trip of I km was recorded 5.1.3 Hotspot suess determination ‘The bottom flange ofthe cossbeam and the stoners inside the box can be interpreted as double gussets welded on both sides ofthe web, No suitable parametic formula ws found for this geometry and a local slid element model subjected to constant membrane stess vas used for resolving the membrane sues concentatio. The membrane sess is obtained asthe tverage ofthe symmetry plane apd surface steses at distances of 4 and 1.0 fom the weld toc Linear extrapolation to weld toe is performed according to Equation (1). Stress magnification due to angular misalignment caused by welding distin is ealeulated using Equations (13) and (14) using the spacing of the crossbeams as 2/ end, doe to symmetry, assuming fixed ends, 8“The misalignment stess magnification factor, Kay is nonlinear with respect to the applied membrane siress and should be computed based on the maximum and minimum stresses separately. Moreover, the magnification is different for each stress range. A question arses whether the stress magnification should be applied to the nominal membrane stress, mem, OF 0 the more local membrane sess increased bythe structural det. in ths particular cease the stress concentration accu ina rather narrow area, and the secondary’ shell bending induced by straightening of the web plate could be considered as mare global phenomenon, Therefore, itis sufficient to calculate the secondary bending stess (Ky ~ 1) * Atiaoe separately, and add ito the increased membrane stress. Tus, the structural hot spt stess i this case evolved fom the equation. Aa, = (Ky + Ky =I): 8am aay 52 Results 5.2.1 Sires concentration factor, Ky ‘The finite element model with unit stress yielded the results (1.6 mm) = 1.442. MPa and o9(4.0 mm) = 1.283 MPa with a resulting K, = 1.548, 5.22 Computed fatigue life fora perfectly straight web Based on Table 1 an SN curve for non load-carrying fille welds, FATT 100, was used In design calculations the stress ranges should be mulplied by sufficient ye and the fatigue strength values should be divided by sufficient jy. However, because the curent study was @ Failure analysis ase rather than a desian case value of nity for both partial safety factors was assumed. Nominal stress values obiained during the service load measurements were ‘nltpied by the computed value of K, to give the structural stess ranges Ao. The predicted service life i 2.75 x 10° km 5.2.3 Effective misalignment magnification factor, Ky Damage analysis showed thatthe most damaging tess range hada nominal stress range of Ayan = 25.2 MPa. Because of te deadweight of the vehicle a high nominal mean sires value of 40 MPa was assumed and resulted in maximum and minimum sess values for this stress range of Gpomas™ 52.6 MPa and Cyae =27.4 MP "Based on Equations (12) and (11) the misalignment magnification factors are Ky at the maximum stres and Ky 1.96 atthe minimum stress. The resulting magnified stress range is 35.3 MPa and the effective magnification factor is: 6 ‘The effective misalignment magnification factor is used to correct al tress ranges sccotding to Equation (14). The total damage of the lad spectrum is significantly increasedthe predicted characteristic life fr the misaligned web is reduced to 1.16 x 10°km. This ‘computed fatigue life coresponds well with the observation of fis cracking inthe structure during service. The effect of welding distortion inthe web is irl large. The calculations show thatthe life was reduced by 58 %. 1. & Niemi Sica Sets Approach to Fatigue nab of Welded Component, IW XII-181940, 2 Whe: Pro 11 Ptigu Seninar, 2002). 53) ENV 1990: Luocode 5: Dein of tel Stes - Pa 11, CEN (199), 4. A Mobbecher IW document XUI599-963V-88536. 5. Peas Bry Sanda est (1981). & tw ouiance on Asesnent ofthe ines fr Puporeof Welded Srocrcs IW/ISSST115790 5. S11 Maddow: Fatiae Song of Welded Succes (990 1 D.knlnjand © M Sonne Pate aexman of welded ose by lel approaches (198) 5. PIV. Lawrence, Rj Mato, Hipsida snd! D Burk ASTI STP 805 (197), p34 To, Jrde Backs Proc 34 BCSC Ofthre CoO Sel in rine Stare (1987, 2, 11, Tes Wal in th Weld, 221988). 222 12, FLW Marshall: Developmen in Ci Enginsring, 3 (192), p42 1B, RepomundedFatgue Design Proce for Wed How Section Jos IW Doe. xW-IC2199¢KIN- © 1729, 14, Garmanscer Loy Rafe for Claseication and Contin Par Ship Teco, 1.1 Segoing ships Fa art, Anes Tengu (1998). 15, Burns Vert: Pau Sengh of Welded Shp Scars, Pub. NI398 DSM ROI E (998) {6 gran 134453, Untied rene Vest “art 3: Dein, CEN (199) 17, E Niel ed) Seuss Determination for Fatigue Ans of Welded Component (1998), 1ST0W 1221-93. Ii, F babe and N, Rico: Locllobl areas aso fe welded os. TW Doe, X-I737-38, 19. T Paranen a, Ni: Welding he Worl, 4 (999), 16 2B. Woveten Fatigue Asesement of Welded Ato Sp Dts. PAD tess, NTNU (199) 31 $1 Mado Welding Instat Reteorch Roper 278, (985) 22 Det Norske Vers: Ptigue sete of Ship Sacre Clasestion News Na 307 (199). 23, Racock Pre, It Cof on Panne Vs Tacnolgy (979),p #2. 24 SORSOK Standard N-004 Delgo Ste! Sacre, mex C, Fatigue Stegth Anas (1998) 35, Mga Proc ofthe Ofthore Tubular ois Conference (198. -9-