Refine
Year of publication
Institute
Has Fulltext
- yes (49) (remove)
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (31)
- Article (15)
- Lecture (3)
Keywords
- Finite-Elemente-Methode (16)
- Einspielen <Werkstoff> (13)
- shakedown analysis (8)
- FEM (6)
- limit analysis (5)
- Einspielanalyse (4)
- Limit analysis (4)
- Shakedown (4)
- Shakedown analysis (4)
- Technische Mechanik (4)
Im Rahmen von Ermüdungsanalysen ist nachzuweisen, daß die thermisch bedingten fortschreitenden Deformationen begrenzt bleiben. Hierzu ist die Abgrenzung des Shakedown-Bereiches (Einspielen) vom Ratchetting-Bereich (fortschreitende Deformation) von Interesse. Im Rahmen eines EU-geförderten Forschungsvorhabens wurden Experimente mit einem 4-Stab-Modell durchgeführt. Das Experiment bestand aus einem wassergekühlten inneren Rohr und drei isolierten und beheizbaren äußeren Probestäben. Das System wurde durch alternierende Axialkräfte, denen alternierende Temperaturen an den äußeren Stäben überlagert wurden, belastet. Die Versuchsparameter wurden teilweise nach vorausgegangenen Einspielanalysen gewählt. Während der Versuchsdurchführung wurden Temperaturen und Dehnungen zeitabhängig gemessen. Begleitend und nachfolgend zur Versuchsdurchführung wurden die Belastungen und die daraus resultierenden Beanspruchungen nachvollzogen. Bei dieser inkrementellen elasto-plastischen Analyse mit dem Programm ANSYS wurden unterschiedliche Werkstoffmodelle angesetzt. Die Ergebnisse dieser Simulationsberechnung dienen dazu, die Shakedown-Analysen mittels FE-Methode zu verifizieren.
Structural design analyses are conducted with the aim of verifying the exclusion of ratcheting. To this end it is important to make a clear distinction between the shakedown range and the ratcheting range. In cyclic plasticity more sophisticated hardening models have been suggested in order to model the strain evolution observed in ratcheting experiments. The hardening models used in shakedown analysis are comparatively simple. It is shown that shakedown analysis can make quite stable predictions of admissible load ranges despite the simplicity of the underlying hardening models. A linear and a nonlinear kinematic hardening model of two-surface plasticity are compared in material shakedown analysis. Both give identical or similar shakedown ranges. Structural shakedown analyses show that the loading may have a more pronounced effect than the hardening model.
Smoothed Finite Element Methods for Nonlinear Solid Mechanics Problems: 2D and 3D Case Studies
(2016)
The Smoothed Finite Element Method (SFEM) is presented as an edge-based and a facebased techniques for 2D and 3D boundary value problems, respectively. SFEMs avoid shortcomings of the standard Finite Element Method (FEM) with lower order elements such as overly stiff behavior, poor stress solution, and locking effects. Based on the idea of averaging spatially the standard strain field of the FEM over so-called smoothing domains SFEM calculates the stiffness matrix for the same number of degrees of freedom (DOFs) as those of the FEM. However, the SFEMs significantly improve accuracy and convergence even for distorted meshes and/or nearly incompressible materials.
Numerical results of the SFEMs for a cardiac tissue membrane (thin plate inflation) and an artery (tension of 3D tube) show clearly their advantageous properties in improving accuracy particularly for the distorted meshes and avoiding shear locking effects.
Structural design analyses are conducted with the aim of verifying the exclusion of ratchetting. To this end it is important to make a clear distinction between the shakedown range and the ratchetting range. The performed experiment comprised a hollow tension specimen which was subjected to alternating axial forces, superimposed with constant moments. First, a series of uniaxial tests has been carried out in order to calibrate a bounded kinematic hardening rule. The load parameters have been selected on the basis of previous shakedown analyses with the PERMAS code using a kinematic hardening material model. It is shown that this shakedown analysis gives reasonable agreement between the experimental and the numerical results. A linear and a nonlinear kinematic hardening model of two-surface plasticity are compared in material shakedown analysis.
In: Technical feasibility and reliability of passive safety systems for nuclear power plants. Proceedings of an Advisory Group Meeting held in Jülich, 21-24 November 1994. - Vienna , 1996. - Seite: 43 - 55 IAEA-TECDOC-920 Abstract: It is shown that the difficulty for probabilistic fracture mechanics (PFM) is the general problem of the high reliability of a small population. There is no way around the problem as yet. Therefore what PFM can contribute to the reliability of steel pressure boundaries is demonstrated with the example of a typical reactor pressure vessel and critically discussed. Although no method is distinguishable that could give exact failure probabilities, PFM has several additional chances. Upper limits for failure probability may be obtained together with trends for design and operating conditions. Further, PFM can identify the most sensitive parameters, improved control of which would increase reliability. Thus PFM should play a vital role in the analysis of steel pressure boundaries despite all shortcomings.