FKM Guideline “Fracture Mechanics Proof of Strength for Engineering Components” — Overview and Extension Topics

The German guideline “Fracture Mechanics Proof of Strength for Engineering Components” has been released in 2001 as a result of activities sponsored by the Research Committee on Mechanical Engineering (FKM), task group “Component Strength”. The guideline describes basics for the integrity assessment of cracked components subjected to static or cyclic loading and provides a step-by-step computational procedure for the use in engineering practice. The guideline was formulated based on a number of national and international reference documents, in particular SINTAP, R6, BS 7910 and DVS-2401, recent research results and some own key aspects. Since 2004 it is also available in English. The procedures and solutions of the guideline are implemented in the computer program FracSafe. The latest 3rd edition of the guideline (2005) includes several new topics. These allow for the consideration of special effects at cyclic loading, mixed mode loading, dynamic (impact) loading, stress corrosion cracking, probabilistic aspects in fracture mechanics calculations. In addition, the compendium of the stress intensity factor and limit load solutions is extended and adjusted according to the state-of-the-art. Some new examples and case studies are included to demonstrate the application of the procedure to engineering problems. This paper gives an overview of the guideline and describes new features available since its 1st edition.

[1]  W. Dahl,et al.  Application of Fracture Mechanics to Materials and Structures , 1984 .

[2]  F. Erdogan,et al.  On the Crack Extension in Plates Under Plane Loading and Transverse Shear , 1963 .

[3]  Hans Albert Richard,et al.  Theoretical crack path prediction , 2005 .

[4]  F. M. Burdekin,et al.  Engineering critical analyses to BS 7910 — the UK guide on methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures , 2000 .

[5]  C Boller,et al.  Materials Data for Cyclic Loading , 1990 .

[6]  R. Wellein.  Assessment of the Reliability of the Steel Containment of a PWR by Probabilistic Fracture Mechanics: Distributions of Material Properties and Defect Dimensions , 1984 .

[7]  Guk-Rwang Won.  American Society for Testing and Materials , 1987 .

[8]  Ludvik Hodulak,et al.  Bruchmechanische Bewertung von Fehlern in Schweißverbindungen : Merkblatt DVS 2401 (August 2004) , 2004 .

[9]  T. Seeger,et al.  THE CONSEQUENCES OF SHORT CRACK CLOSURE ON FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH UNDER VARIABLE AMPLITUDE LOADING , 1991 .

[10]  James W. Provan,et al.  Probabilistic fracture mechanics and reliability , 1987 .

[11]  Timm Seeger,et al.  A Unified Elastic-Plastic Model for Fatigue Crack Growth at Notches Including Crack Closure Effects , 1999 .

[12]  Hans Albert Richard,et al.  3D Fracture Criteria for Structures with Cracks , 2003 .

[13]  Guido Dhondt,et al.  Cutting of a 3-D finite element mesh for automatic mode I crack propagation calculations , 1998 .

[14]  Michael Vormwald.  Anrißlebensdauervorhersage auf der Basis der Schwingbruchmechanik für kurze Risse , 1989 .

[15]  Igor Varfolomeyev,et al.  FKM Guideline “Fracture Mechanics Proof of Strength for Engineering Components”: Procedures, Compendiums, Examples , 2008 .

[16]  Robert A. Ainsworth,et al.  Assessment of the integrity of structures containing defects , 1987 .

[17]  Michael Wünsche,et al.  Numerical and experimental investigations of curved fatigue crack growth under proportional cyclic loading , 2003 .

[18]  W Böhme,et al.  Dynamic Key-Curves for Brittle Fracture Impact Tests and Establishment of a Transition Time , 1990 .

[19]  Peter Dillström.  ProSINTAP – A probabilistic program implementing the SINTAP assessment procedure , 2000 .

[20]  H. Saunders,et al.  Probabilistic Fracture Mechanics and Fatigue Methods—Applications for Structural Design of Maintenance , 1983 .

[21]  P. C. Paris,et al.  A Critical Analysis of Crack Propagation Laws , 1963 .