Issue34

C. Fischer et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 34 (2015) 99-108; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.34.10 106 The results referring to equal σ eff = 425 MPa are listed in Tab. 3 to Tab. 5. At Detail A, the calculated final crack shapes as well as the weld shape factors are almost similar to the previous simulations (Tab. 2), despite of the sloped attachment. Additionally, the calculated fatigue lives of the transverse attachment with and without stress gradient (variant 1 and 2) agree with each other. Small deviations, however, are obtained for both the supported transverse attachment (3) and the complex structure (5). Here, the sloped layout affects the stress distributions over the complete cross section on the symmetry plane which can be recognized by the normalized SIF, as illustrated for the two configurations of the supported transverse attachment (3) in Fig. 8. Higher values appear at the eccentric, sloped layout beyond a > 1.75 mm and lead to faster crack propagation and shorter life finally. In Detail B, the weld flank angle is smaller at the same time and reduces the local stress concentration at the weld toe which becomes apparent in generally smaller weld shape factors K W . Hence, higher external loadings are required for  eff = 425 MPa and the fatigue lives are shorter compared to the other two configurations, see Tab. 2 to Tab. 4. Additionally, the structural hot-spot stresses rise according to Eq. (2) since  eff is constant and K W smaller. That effect in conjunction with the lower stress concentration decreases the degree of bending at Detail B. Moreover, the effect of the bending constraint at the complex structure (5) is highly reduced since the relative life rises by only about 21%. normalized SIF unterstützte Quersteife (C) Quersteife mit Gradient (B) 0,6 0,9 1,2 1,5 0 2 4 6 8 supported transverse attachment (3) with vertical layout supported transverse attachment (3) with eccentric and sloped layout, Detail B crack depth a [mm] Figure 8 : Influence of the layout of the transverse attachment on the SIF. computed fatigue life N p (thousand) 350 250 150 transverse attachment (1) supported transverse attachment (3) 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.83 0.92  = 45°  = 45°  = 45°  = 45°  = 25°  = 33° different weld flank angle different slope Detail A Detail A Detail B Detail C vertical layout vertical layout Figure 9 : Influence of slope and weld flank angle on fatigue life, shown for selected variants for equal  eff . 1) Transverse attachment 2) Transverse attachment w. gradient 3) Supported transverse attachment 5) Complex structure Degree of bending  0.0 0.266 0.266 0.266 Weld shape factor K W 2,11 2,00 1,93 1,98 Fatigue life N P 245,500 259,300 266,000 297,000 Rel. fatigue life 1.00 1.06 1.08 1.21 Table 4 : Computed fatigue life N p for the same effective notch stress σ eff = 425 MPa at Detail B. In detail, K W at the sloped transverse attachment (1) of Detail B, is about 12% smaller compared to the vertical attachment and would shorten fatigue life by about 40% due to increased external loadings. The flatter flank angle, however, compensates the effect partly as the relative lives differ by about 17%. A similar difference is obtained when the effects of the deviating weld shape factors and M k factors referring to the flank angle are considered. At variant 2, the degree of bending decreases and shortens the fatigue life as shown in Fig. 5. At the last Detail C, the flank angle modifies the stress distribution over the plate thickness and increases weld shape factors but not as much that they agree with the vertical configuration. Hence, the required level of the external loading is changed and the fatigue lives of the variants are longer than for Detail B but shorter for the other, see Tab. 5, Tab. 4 and