Issue 30

P. Corigliano et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 30 (2014) 304-310; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.30.37 309 Figure 19 : ε x at F max (u x = 1.2 mm). Figure 17 : Deformed shape of specimen at F min . Figure 18 : FE deformed shape at F min . Figure 20 : ε x at F min (u x =-1.2 mm). Although the behavior is well represented, the values, in terms of ε x at F max and F min , differ from the experimental data, due to residual stresses. For this reason a further analysis of the strain range Δ ε x , evaluated between F max and F min , i.e. after relaxation during initial loading, was done and the results were compared with DIC data, as shown in Fig. 21. The comparison, in this case, shows a general good agreement, but the FE analysis exhibits larger strains in the notch proximity. Figure 21 : DIC vs FE values of Δ ε x . C ONCLUSIONS procedure was developed to analyze the response of the investigated cruciform welded joint under static loading. It is based on the following steps: the hardness measurements, using an innovative method for the identification of the different zones (BM, HAZ, and WM) and the assessment of their constitutive curves, the realization of a nonlinear finite element analysis considering the different material properties and, finally, the validation of FE model by means of the experimental data, obtained by DIC technique. The applied procedure allows providing useful information to the development of models for the prediction of fracture behaviour of the welded joints also under fatigue loading. A