Pressure Vessel Design: Bree Diagram

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Просмотров: 296

Pressure Vessel Design: Bree Diagram

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- A Comparison of Elastic-Plastic and Variable Modulus-Cracking Constitutive Models for Prestressed Concrete Reactor Vessels-Anderson&Smith 1978
- AbaqusExplicit Honeycomb Material Model
- AMD Tutorial Stress Strain
- Impact Tests
- Testing for Crash & Safety Simulation
- DAC42 Guardiani 46 2
- The Interaction of Pressure, In-plane Moment and Torque Loadings on Piping Elbows
- Contents 2
- Nonlinear Analysis Methods for Reinforced Concrete Buildings With Shear Walls
- FEA of Nonlinear Problems
- ASTM D 3163 – 01 Determining Strength of Adhesively Bonded Rigid Plastic
- Weber Lush Zavaliangos Anand 1990.pdf
- Hw 1 BIOMATERIALS UMN
- Void Growth to Coalescence in a Non-local Material
- Solution 6
- Tutorial 3
- Applied Plasticity_Syllabus_J Chakrabarty
- Elasticity Viscosity Theory E
- NahshonHutch2008.pdf
- A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF NUMERICAL MODELS FOR CONCRETE CRACKING

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 22

Last Update: 7/7/10 Original Ref: J.Bree, J.Strain Analysis (1967) 2, 226-238. Below I derive Bree s Figure 3 (reproduced here as Figure 12) in my own manner. It is consierably more detailed than Bree s terse exposition. Problem: A body is subject to a constant uniaxial primary membrane stress,

p

, and

also a uniaxial secondary bending stress which cycles between zero and t . The secondary bending stress is strain controlled, e.g., being caused by a uniform throughwall temperature gradient. The body is restrained from bending. However, it is possible for a net membrane strain to arise. Objective: On a diagram of secondary stress range,

t

, find

the region(s) which correspond to ratcheting, and the region which corresponds to cyclic plasticity (creep-fatigue). In the former case determine the ratchet strain per cycle, and in the latter case the cyclic strain range. Analysis A through-wall coordinate system, x, is defined with x 0 being midwall, and the surfaces being x

t / 2 . The thermal strains are

2x t

t

, where

T . If

is

E

E

p

p

2x t

(1)

the parameter t is constant. The restraint of bending ensures that the total strain, , is also a constant with respect to x, though it may vary from one half-cycle to the next. When off-load, the thermal strain is zero and (1) becomes, (Off load) The yield criterion is simply

E

y

(2)

y

. If

that point is zero. On the first half-cycle, i.e., when load is first applied, any region with y therefore has zero plastic strain. Hence (1) implies that the slope of the stress versus x plot must be

2 t

t

p t y

In the general case, assuming there is some yielding (i.e. that after first loading will consist of, [A] Either, a region in tensile yield, (Figure 1), [B] Or, a region in tensile yield,

y y y

) the stress

2 t

and slope

y

2 t

(Figure 8).

Case [A] The stress after the first half-cycle is assumed to be as shown in Figure 1. The maximum compressive stress must be such that 1 y . But the requirement that the slope is

2 t

t

requires,

y 1

2 t

t 2

and hence,

2a t

(3)

t

y

1 t 2 2

and hence,

4

1

p y

2a 1 t

(4)

1 2a t 2

y t p

and hence a

2a t

t 1 2 2

y t

(5)

Since gives,

y t

p t

and hence Y 1 X

(6)

X

p y

and

t y

(7)

(6) establishes that Case [A] lies below the parabola Y 1 X 1 on the Bree diagram (Figure 12). However, we have yet to distinguish between regions S1 and R1. To find the strain distribution after the first half-cycle firstly note that at x have p 0 and hence (1) gives,

E

1 y

a we

2a t

(8)

a , (1)

The superscript on the total strain refers to the first half-cycle. But also, for x gives,

E

1 y

E

a t

1 p

2x t

x t

(9) (10)

1 p

1 p

This results in the plastic strain distribution after the first half-cycle, the black line in Figure 2.

, as given by

2nd Half-Cycle The thermal strains have now been removed and so (2) applies. The slope of the stress distribution must therefore be equal opposite to that of E p at all points. Note that this is the total plastic strain accumulated to-date, i.e.,

1 p 2 p

with non-zero stress slope must be non-yielding in the 2 half-cycle and hence have 2 0 , and hence have opposite slope to the black line in Figure 2. This establishes p that the non-yielding region in the 2nd half-cycle has slope

2 t

t

nd

. Equilibrium is then

sufficient to establish that the stress distribution must be as shown in Figure 3. To find the plastic strains after the 2nd half-cycle, firstly consider the region x a where y and for which (2) gives,

E

2 y

1 2 p

(11)

where

1 2 p

1 p

2 p

is the total plastic strain due to the 1st plus 2nd half-cycles. Now

2 1 p

E E

(12)

1 p

1 2 p

1 p

a t x t

algebraically is, (x a)

y

(13)

E

2 y

4a t

(14)

1 2 p

E

1 2 p 1 p

1 2 p

4a t

(15)

shown in Figure 4.

3rd Half-Cycle The stress distribution now returns to that of Figure 1. The plastic strains in the region x a are therefore unchanged from those of Figure 4, since this region is nonyielding on the loading half-cycle. Hence (1) gives, (x

a)

E

3

1 2 p

2x t

where

x t

a t

1 2 p

3 y

6a t

(17)

In region x (x

a)

a (1) becomes,

3 y

1 2 3 p

2x t

(18)

a)

1 2 3 p

x t

3a t

(19)

Hence (15) and (19) together give the plastic strain distribution after the 3rd half-cycle, 1 2 3 , shown as the red line in Figure 2. p The effect of the complete cycle comprising the 2nd and 3rd half-cycles is to shift the plastic strain curve upwards uniformly by an amount

4a t

t

the red line in Figure 2 is above the black line). Repeating the analysis reveals that each unloading half-cycle increases the plastic n strain by an amount 2 p as shown in Figure 5 (obtained by subtracting the black line in Figure 2 from Figure 4). Similarly, each loading half-cycle increases the plastic strain by an amount

2n 1 p

as

shown in Figure 6 (obtained by subtracting Figure 4 from the red line in Figure 2). Hence the ratchet strain over a whole cycle is the sum of Figures 5 and 6, which is just the uniform (membrane) strain

4a t

t

4a t

t

per cycle

(20)

(6) has established that Case [A] lies below the parabola Y 1 X 1 on the Bree diagram (Figure 12). But we still need to determine the boundary within this region which demarks ratcheting from shakedown. This will be found to be the condition, Ratcheting:

a 0

4a t

t

(21)

E

, since a 0 is

the condition that the ratchet strain be positive and this is almost obvious given that the primary stress is tensile. However, to show this rigorously we consider what would happen if we took a 0 . The equivalent to Figures 1, 2 and 3 can be derived exactly as before and are shown as Figures 7a, b and c. No problem is apparent at this stage. However, see what happens when we attempt to derive the strain after the 2nd half-cycle. Consider the region a x a . Equ.(2) gives,

E

2

1 p

(22)

a t

1 p

a t

2 p

plastic strain increment in the first half-cycle is also zero, apparently gives E

2 y

that the total strain be constant over the section due to restrained bending. Thus we see that a 0 is not an allowed condition. To be more precise, a 0 is not allowed if the stress distribution after the 2nd halfcycle looks qualitatively like Figure 7c, i.e., with a yielded region x a . But what if elastic unloading with no yielding prevailed? The stresses obtained from Figure 7a by elastic unloading would be t t / 2 and y 1 on x t on x t / 2 . For elastic loading to prevail we thus require,

t 1 t y

and

2

y

(23)

2a t

t

0 which implies a 0

(24)

Thus we see that elastic unloading does indeed occur for a 0 . This is illustrated by the red lines on Figure 7c. This proves that (21) is indeed the ratcheting condition, as claimed, whereas the opposite, (24), gives elastic unloading, i.e., shakedown. Finally, we note from (5) that the ratcheting condition can be written, Ratcheting: 1 2

y t p

or

y t

1 4

or X

Y 4

1 Y 4

(25)

1 is the

Y 4

1 , the condition X

4a t

boundary between the shakedown and ratcheting regions, S1 and R1 on Figure 12. If

X 1 then ratcheting occurs with ratchet strain

Y 4

t

Y 4

zero ratchet strain per cycle. The ratchet strain is continuous across the boundary

X 1 , however, because on this boundary a 0 .

Case (B) We have still to investigate the alternative case of a region in tensile yield, a separated region in compressive yield, connecting them with slope

2 t

t

, and

1 , we expect that this Case (B) will

be the region above this parabola. In case (A) we found that ratcheting occurred when the initial stress distribution on-load, Figure 1, had its tensile yield zone extending from the negative x value, a , where a 0 , to x t / 2 . Consequently we guess that Figure 8, as drawn with its tensile yield zone again extending from the negative x value, a , where a 0 , to x t / 2 , might again produce ratcheting. The plastic strain distribution,

pt 1 p,

a t/2 b a b

t/2

y y y

(26a) (26b)

b x

a b

Xt

E x 2x t

t y

x b b a

2x Y t

(27)

b a t Y

(28)

2b t X 1 Y

and

2a t

1 Y

(29)

(27) becomes,

E

y

b

y

1 Y Y

XY

(30)

Now consider x

a , we have,

E XY

1 p

y

1 p

2x Y t

(31) (32)

Hence, At x

E

y

XY 1

2x Y t

1 p

E

y 1 p

0 . At x t / 2 we get,

At x t / 2 : Now consider x

XY

Y 1

(33)

b , we have,

E XY

1 p

y

1 p

2x Y t

(34) (35)

Hence, At x

E

y

XY

2x Y t

1 p

0 . At x

t / 2 we get,

At x

t / 2:

E

y

1 p

XY

(36)

On the negative side of the stress distribution we clearly require that this plastic strain is negative, which gives,

Y1 X 1

(37)

This establishes that case (B) corresponds to the region above the parabola Y 1 X 1 , just as case (A) corresponds to the region below this parabola. [Incidentally, requiring that (33) be a positive strain requires Y 1 X 1 , which is implied by (37) and adds nothing more]. The results (32) and (35) permit the plastic strain after the first half-cycle, plotted as shown in Figure 8 by the red lines. 2nd Half-Cycle Firstly consider what would be implied if the stress in the region b x a after the 2nd half-cycle (unloading) was not constant. The plastic strain for both half cycles 2 x , since the thermal would be zero, and hence 1 0 . This would require E p strain has been removed. But this is a contradiction since the LHS is independent of x, whereas the RHS is not. We conclude that the stress is constant in the region b x a . We consider later what happens if this stress is less than yield magnitude (see case C ). For now we assume it equals yield. But the tensile yield stress must extend beyond x a in order to produce a positive load. The simplest distribution which is clearly in equilibrium with the applied primary membrane load is a shown in Figure 9. In fact it is clear that this is the only possibility. This follows since the slope of the line is fixed to be equal and opposite to the slope of E 1 p by virtue of their sum, E , being independent of x. And the sum of the positions shown as a and b is fixed by equilibrium, i.e., Equ.(26b). This establishes the stress distribution shown in Figure 9. The plastic strain distribution is found as follows. Consider firstly the region a x b . We have, since

E E

1 p

1 p,

to be

2 p

0 in this region,

2

y

XY 1

2x Y t

2x Y t

2

x a b a

(38) (39)

Or,

E

y

XY

x a b a

E

y

XY

a b a

XY

1 Y Y

1 2 p

2 XY

(40)

x a:

, so that, (41)

E

y

1 2 p

2 XY 1

x b:

E

y 1 2 p

1 2 p

, so that, (42)

2 XY

At this stage it is not yet clear that the plastic strain (41) is positive, though this will be proved shortly. The plastic strain distribution after the 2nd half-cycle is shown in Figure 9 by the red lines. 3rd Half-Cycle The stress as shown in Figure 8 is now re-established. The plastic strain after the third half-cycle is found as follows. Consider firstly the region b x a . We have, since 3 0 in this region, p

E E

1 2 p

2x Y t

1 2 p

x b b a

2x Y t

(43)

Hence,

E

y

2 XY 1 2 XY 3

1 2 X

x b b a 3 XY

2x Y t 2

2 XY 1

1 2

b b a

(44)

1 Y Y

E E

b for which,

1 2 3 p y

2x Y t

(45)

2x Y t

1 2 3 p

implies At x

x x

E

y

1 2 3 p

3 XY

2 1

2x Y t

3 XY

E

y

1

E

y 1 2 p

(46)

2( XY 1) . At

t / 2 (46) gives, t / 2:

E

y

1 2 3 p

3 XY

Y 1

(47)

E E

a for which,

1 2 3 p y

2x Y t

(48)

2x Y t

implies At x

E

y

1 2 3 p

3 XY

2 1

2x Y t

3 XY 1

(49)

1 2 p

E

y

1 2 3 p

E

y

2( XY 1) . At

E

y 1 2 3 p

3 XY

(50)

The plastic strain after the 3rd half-cycle is thus as shown in Figure 8 by the upper red line. Ratchet Strain The salient fact about the plastic strain distribution after the 3rd half-cycle is that it lies a uniform (membrane) amount above the plastic strain after the first half cycle. This is established by considering the increases in plastic strain between the 1st and 3rd halfcycles at representative points:x t / 2:

E

p y

3 XY

XY

2 XY

(51a) (51b)

a:

E

p y

2 XY

0 2 XY

t/2:

E

p y

3 XY

XY

2 XY 1

(51c)

E

p y

2 XY 1

(52)

XY 1

(53)

Hence, (53) together with (37) establishes that the distributions of Figures 8 and 9 correspond to the ratcheting region R2 of the Bree diagram, Figure 12, i.e., above both parabolas. Note that by virtue of (29), the ratchet condition (53) can equally be written simply,

a 0

(54)

which is exactly the same criterion as for case (A), i.e., (21), as we guessed initially. A summary of what we have shown so far is, The ratcheting condition is a > 0 for both cases (A) and (B), so Figures 1 and 8 are correct as drawn. They correspond to the ratcheting regions R1 and R2 on the Bree diagram, Figure 12, respectively.

For case (A), Figure 1, if a < 0 then we are in the shakedown region S1 of the Bree diagram, Figure 12.

2Y

2 Y1 X

2 XY 1

But we have left some unfinished business. What does Figure 8 imply if we let a be negative? This gives us . Case (C) The stress distribution after the 1st half-cycle is now as given by Figure 10. Note that the definition of a has been reversed in sign so that a is still a positive quantity. We shall see that Figure 10 corresponds to the region P of the Bree diagram, Figure 12. It will be shown to have zero ratchet strain but plastic strain increments at the surfaces which are equal and opposite on each alternate half-cycle. This is the region of global shakedown which does not ratchet but which can cause creep-fatigue damage accumulation at the surfaces due to the cyclically reversing plastic strains. This is the region addressed by an R5V2/3 crack initiation assessment with a hysteresis cycle. Firstly we derive the plastic strains corresponding to Figure 10, and the values of a and b. Equilibrium gives,

X

yt y

t/2 a

t/2 b

hence Xt b a

(55)

In the region

E

y

x b a b

2x Y t

(56)

The x-independence of

therefore implies,

a b t Y

(57)

X

2b t

1 Y

and

2a t

1 Y

(58)

These are the same as (29) except that a is reversed in sign. (56) becomes,

E

y

1 2

b a b

1 Y

X Y

XY

(59)

E

y

XY

E

p y

p

1

a

2x Y t

hence,

E

p y

XY

2x Y t

(60)

0 whilst at x t / 2 we get,

E

p y

t/2

XY

(61)

E

y

b . We have,

1

b

XY

E

p y

p

2x Y t

hence,

E

p y

XY

2x Y t

(62)

0 whilst at x

t / 2 we get,

E

p y

t/2

XY

(63)

But this plastic strain must be negative, since it is on the negative side of the stress distribution and there has been no previous plastic straining. So XY Y 1 0 , which gives,

Y1 X 1 1.

(64)

So, like case (B), case (C) = Figure 10 lies above the parabola Y 1 X 2nd Half-Cycle

After the thermal load is removed, the stress in the region b x a must be constant (flat). If it were not, then it would be elastic and hence the plastic strain increment on the 2nd half-cycle would be zero. But the plastic strain in the 1st half-cycle is zero also. And the thermal strain has become zero after the 2nd half-cycle. So this would mean that E x , but this is a contradiction since is x-independent. Hence, the stress must be constant in region b x a . The most general stress distribution after the 2nd half-cycle is therefore as shown in Figure 11. We shall derive the value of the stress, 0 , in region b x a , and also the positions c and c which denote the extent of the regions at yield in Figure 11. It will be found that c c , but this is not obvious at this stage. Firstly consider region c x b . The plastic strain increment during unloading is zero, so the total plastic strain equals that for the 1st half-cycle, which is given by (62) in this region. Hence the relation E E p gives,

c x b:

E

y

XY

2x Y t

(65)

But at x

c the stress is

so that

E XY 2c Y t 2

y

(66)

So (65) becomes,

c x b:

y 0 y

2c t

(67) (68)

Hence,

2c b Y t

This specifies the core stress, 0 , if we can find c [and given that we know b from (58)]. Now consider region a x c . Following the same reasoning we have,

a x c :

E

y

XY

2x Y t

(69)

so that

E XY 2c Y t 2

y

(70)

c t c 2 Y

(71)

a x c :

y

0 y

2c t

2c t

(72) (73)

Hence,

It is easily shown that (73) follows from (68) given (71) and (58), and so provides no new information. The plastic strains are established as follows, From (66),

x c:

E

y

1 2 p

E

y

1 XY

2c Y t

(74)

From (62),

c x b:

E

y

1 2 p

E

y

1 p

XY

2x Y t

(75)

Now consider the region b x a . Since the stress is less than yield magnitude, and this region was also unyielded in the 1st half-cycle, the plastic strain is zero.

b x a:

E

y

1 2 p

(76)

From (60),

a x c :

E

y

1 2 p

E

y

1 p

XY

2x Y t

(77)

From (70),

x c :

E

y

1 2 p

E

y

1 XY

2c Y t

(78)

Note that (74-78) are consistent at the boundaries between the regions, by virtue of (58). Finally we employ equilibrium. Note that the slope of the stress plot is the same in regions c x b and a x c because of (67) and (69). Hence the sum of the contributions of these regions to the force is zero, and equilibrium can be written,

y

t/2 c

t/2 c

Xt

(79)

t Y c 3c 2b

Xt

(80)

t Y 2t Y c 3c X 1 t Y Xt

(81)

c

c

t Y

c t Y

(82a) (82b)

It follows that the plastic strains at the surfaces, from (74) and (78) become,

E

y 1 2 p

t/2

XY 1

(83) (84)

E

y

1 2 p

t/2

XY

1 2 p

But we know that the surface strain strain in region c x Hence, from (83),

E

y

x a.

1 2 p

t/2

XY 1 0

XY 1

In other words,

(85)

This contrasts with case (B) which lay above this hyperbola. Since case (C) lies below this hyperbola, but above Y 1 X 1 , it lies in the regions P or S2 on the Bree diagram, Figure 12. It is clear that, for Figure 10 to become Figure 11 on removal of the thermal stress we must also have t 2 y . This establishes that case (C) can be identified with region P alone. What we have not yet shown is that there is no ratchet strain in this case. For this we need to consider the 3rd half-cycle. But first note that (82a) and (58) mean that the core stress, (68), becomes simply,

0 y

XY

(86)

3rd Half-Cycle The stress now returns to that of Figure 10. The region strain, so,

E x 2x t

y y

2x t

x b a b

(87)

The RHS of (87) is independent of x, by virtue of (58), as it should be. Hence it gives,

E

y

XY

(88)

For x a we have,

E

y

E

y

1 2 3 p

2x Y t

(89)

E

y

1 2 3 p

E

y

2x Y t

XY

2x Y t

(90) (91)

E

y

1 2 3 p

t/2

XY

Note that (90) and (91) are the same as the plastic strains after the 1st half-cycle, (60) and (61), showing that there has been no ratchet strain and that a stable hysteresis cycle has developed. For x

b we have,

E

y

E

y

1 2 3 p

2x Y t

(92)

XY 2x Y t 1

E

y

1 2 3 p

E

y

2x Y t Y 1

(93) (94)

E

y

1 2 3 p

t/2

XY

Note that (93) and (94) are the same as the plastic strains after the 1st half-cycle, (62) and (63), showing that there has been no ratchet strain and that a stable hysteresis cycle has developed. The plastic strains after the 2nd half-cycle in the regions c x b and a x c are the same as (93) and (90) respectively. So the only regions in which the plastic strains change after the first half-cycle are the regions within the distance c of either surface. The plastic strain ranges at the surfaces are (1st 2nd half-cycles):At x At x

t / 2:

E

p y

1 XY

XY 1

2 Y

(95)

2

t/2:

E

p y

1 XY

XY

(96)

depth of the plastic zone should decrease as the thermal stress is increased, but this is the prediction. Of course, this is only true provided we remain within the region XY 1 , i.e., within the region P of the Bree diagram, Figure 12. So we have 1 / Y X and hence c Xt , which seems more reasonable. Nevertheless, for a fixed primary stress, the depth of the cyclic plastic zone decreases as the boundary XY 1 is approached from below, reaching a minimum when ratcheting starts. At this point the core stress, 0 , reaches yield and so the tensile yield zone is greater than t/2 in extent both with and without the thermal stress (Figures 1 and 3).

Figure 12

This document was created with Win2PDF available at http://www.win2pdf.com. The unregistered version of Win2PDF is for evaluation or non-commercial use only. This page will not be added after purchasing Win2PDF.

- A Comparison of Elastic-Plastic and Variable Modulus-Cracking Constitutive Models for Prestressed Concrete Reactor Vessels-Anderson&Smith 1978Загружено:Concepción de Puentes
- AbaqusExplicit Honeycomb Material ModelЗагружено:adiraju07
- AMD Tutorial Stress StrainЗагружено:rip111176
- Impact TestsЗагружено:b.banerjee.nz6800
- Testing for Crash & Safety SimulationЗагружено:lobo1684
- DAC42 Guardiani 46 2Загружено:ksvinyk7193
- The Interaction of Pressure, In-plane Moment and Torque Loadings on Piping ElbowsЗагружено:hamanoeljammal
- Contents 2Загружено:Daniella Karla
- Nonlinear Analysis Methods for Reinforced Concrete Buildings With Shear WallsЗагружено:akif-benzer-6764
- FEA of Nonlinear ProblemsЗагружено:Michel Zeicher
- ASTM D 3163 – 01 Determining Strength of Adhesively Bonded Rigid PlasticЗагружено:alin2005
- Weber Lush Zavaliangos Anand 1990.pdfЗагружено:Chandra Clark
- Hw 1 BIOMATERIALS UMNЗагружено:sfairhu
- Void Growth to Coalescence in a Non-local MaterialЗагружено:Chandra Clark
- Solution 6Загружено:Arthur Ding
- Tutorial 3Загружено:Kelvin Chew
- Applied Plasticity_Syllabus_J ChakrabartyЗагружено:rasprasad
- Elasticity Viscosity Theory EЗагружено:vuppalasampath
- NahshonHutch2008.pdfЗагружено:Deepesh Raj
- A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF NUMERICAL MODELS FOR CONCRETE CRACKINGЗагружено:tumballisto
- 2015 Tarque_Varum_Blondet Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis Full-scale UR Adobe ModelЗагружено:Jordy Araiza
- 1excuvator Static 11 2Загружено:HimanshuMeshram
- TermsЗагружено:Sheehan Kayne De Cardo
- 2 Deformation, Strain and Materisl PropertiesЗагружено:NaMan SeThi
- 3. Corbel STMЗагружено:Shishir Kumar Nayak
- Yield Criterion for Initially Isotropic Reinforced Slab 1965Загружено:Melkamu Demewez
- Grujicic et al. - 2003 - Computational analysis of the interfacial bonding between feed-powder particles and the substrate in the cold-g.pdfЗагружено:Meita Pratiwi
- 317-4099-6-PBЗагружено:Bishwajit Chowdhury
- Mechanical Characterization and Constitutive Parameter Identification of Anisotropic Tubular Materials for Hydroforming ApplicationsЗагружено:raju
- Refined explicit integration of elastoplastic models with automatic error controlЗагружено:Karena Quiroz

- Unfire Pressure VesselЗагружено:sungkang
- 31172_pdfЗагружено:pajadhav
- 39 Palmstrom on NATMЗагружено:pajadhav
- Ultrasonic TestingЗагружено:pajadhav
- Ultrasonic TestingЗагружено:Fadhilah Qomariyanto
- 737_107_winnerЗагружено:pajadhav
- Mhada_Family_Members_List.pdfЗагружено:pajadhav
- Document 6Загружено:pajadhav
- PVP DesignЗагружено:pajadhav
- Ml 003740252Загружено:pajadhav
- ref_kЗагружено:pajadhav
- 15001957Загружено:pajadhav
- FAQ on One Person CompanyЗагружено:pajadhav
- ML13008A015Загружено:pajadhav
- Stress Classification ASME DIV2 Sec5 V1Загружено:pajadhav
- Nuts and Bolts Stress LinearizationЗагружено:cutefrenzy
- Introduction to Stress Linearization - FEA for AllЗагружено:pajadhav
- Consistent Units — LS-DYNA SupportЗагружено:pajadhav
- Nozzle SMiRT-24 Abstract InstructionsЗагружено:pajadhav
- 1-s2.0-S2212567115013441-mainЗагружено:pajadhav
- Active vs Passive Port f MgtЗагружено:TobelaNcube
- 2. MBA SyllabusЗагружено:nilghhugee
- Ada 196577Загружено:pajadhav
- Maha EsevaЗагружено:pajadhav
- ML030020241.pdfЗагружено:pajadhav
- 25_1Загружено:pajadhav

- Floating Production Sytem -JIP on Mooring SystemsЗагружено:Pavan Ray
- Elements of Fracture MechanicsЗагружено:Machine Design
- ACI Structural Journal.pdfЗагружено:Curioso
- Ice Handbook for EngineersЗагружено:ruayo
- CTOD and pipelines – the past, present and future.pdfЗагружено:ryan.s
- Evaluation of Critical Strain Energy Release Rate for Mode II Crack Propagation in Glass/Epoxy CompositesЗагружено:International Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- Lecture 11 Fatigue 2Загружено:giovanni
- 5 Residual Stresses in Welded StructuresЗагружено:Son Tran
- BasicSystem_1122Загружено:sandeshlikes
- Assesment of Pitting CorrosionЗагружено:Mr.Safety
- 30590406 (3)Загружено:Michael Bautista Baylon
- Nonlinear_Analysis_2010_ENG_FINAL.pdfЗагружено:bhaskar sankar
- 16426p170-184Загружено:Irfan Mahyunis
- Advances in mechanical engineering research. Volume 2.pdfЗагружено:Uday Chahal
- A Fracture Mechanics Model for the Wear of Gear Flanks by PittingЗагружено:Fernando Rocker
- F9.10 KawashitaЗагружено:bnidhal
- Cavity Expansion in Cohesive Frictional SoilsЗагружено:Ngoc Ba Nguyen
- Weld FatigueЗагружено:Jim Gray
- List of Fatigue Standards and Fracture Standards Developed by ASTM & ISOЗагружено:Satrio Aditomo
- (DNV) Det Norske Veritas - 2005 - Material Risk - Ageing Offshore InstallationsЗагружено:Karoline Neumann
- w Se 20080307Загружено:abdsitt
- Artigo CILAMCE PAP0070473Загружено:Diego David
- Chapter 11 NoteЗагружено:Dhrumil Naik
- Aspects of Structural Design with glassЗагружено:mrinalraja
- Mechanics of MaterialsЗагружено:Nikhil Vanam
- Brochure-ang-2013-2014Загружено:Hesser Taboada Michel
- Parallel Iterative Block and Direct Block Methods for 2-Space Dimension Problems on Distributed Memory ArchitectureЗагружено:Md. Rajibul Islam
- Propriedades Fadiga ASTMA36 WJ 1978 11 s334Загружено:Marcell Enzweiler
- Ref 1 1997 SureshЗагружено:sandyme495
- Determination of Uncertainties in Plane StrainЗагружено:sklux

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.