0
Research Papers

Sensitivity Analysis of the Crack Compliance and Layer Removal Methods for Residual Stress Measurement in GFRP Pipes

[+] Author and Article Information
H. W. Carpenter, R. Paskaramoorthy

DST/NRF Centre of Excellence
in Strong Materials,
School of Mechanical, Industrial, and Aeronautical Engineering,
University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg,
Private Bag 3, Wits,
Johannesburg 2050, South Africa

R. G. Reid

DST/NRF Centre of Excellence
in Strong Materials,
School of Mechanical, Industrial, and Aeronautical Engineering,
University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg,
Private Bag 3, Wits,
Johannesburg 2050, South Africa
e-mail: robert.reid@wits.ac.za

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Materials Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MATERIALS AND TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received June 12, 2015; final manuscript received December 15, 2015; published online February 5, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Vadim V. Silberschmidt.

J. Eng. Mater. Technol 138(3), 031001 (Feb 05, 2016) (11 pages) Paper No: MATS-15-1133; doi: 10.1115/1.4032559 History: Received June 12, 2015; Revised December 15, 2015

A comparison is presented between the sensitivity to measurement error of the crack compliance and layer removal methods of residual stress measurement when applied to glass fiber reinforced plastic (GFRP) pipes. This is done by adding random scatter to the exact strain distribution associated with a known stress distribution. This defines strain data that simulate experimental measurements. These data are used to determine the corresponding residual stress distributions. The error in the residual stress distribution when scatter is included can thereby be determined. It is shown that the layer removal and crack compliance methods are equally suitable for the measurement of axial and circumferential stresses in a pipe wound at only ±55 deg. The layer removal method, however, is shown to have significantly lower sensitivity to measurement error when the axial residual stresses in layered GFRP pipes are considered.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Exact axial stress distributions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Exact hoop stress distributions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Circumferential slitting simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Axial slitting simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Layer removal method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Simulated hoop strain distributions for crack compliance method applied to the ±55 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Simulated self-equilibrating hoop stresses for crack compliance method applied to the ±55 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Simulated axial strain distributions for crack compliance method applied to the ±55 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Simulated axial and hoop stress distributions for crack compliance method applied to the ±55 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Simulated axial and hoop strain distributions for layer removal method applied to the ±55 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Simulated axial and hoop stress distributions for layer removal method applied to the ±55 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

SD of the axial stress results for the ±55 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

SD of the hoop stress results for the ±55 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Simulated axial strain distributions for crack compliance method applied to the ±65 deg/±47 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Simulated axial stress distributions for crack compliance method applied to the ±65 deg/±47 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Simulated hoop strain distributions for crack compliance method applied to the ±65 deg/±47 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Simulated self-equilibrating hoop stresses for crack compliance method applied to the ±65 deg/±47 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Total hoop stresses for the crack compliance method applied to the ±65 deg/±47 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Simulated axial and hoop strain distributions for layer removal method applied to the ±65 deg/±47 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Simulated axial stress distributions for layer removal method applied to the ±65 deg/±47 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Simulated hoop stress distributions for layer removal method applied to the ±65 deg/±47 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

SD of the axial stress results for the ±65 deg/±47 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

SD of the hoop stress results for the ±65 deg/±47 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

SD of the axial stress results for the ±75 deg/±36 deg pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

SD of the hoop stress results for the ±75 deg/±36 deg pipe

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In