The Experts below are selected from a list of 90 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Neilor C. Santos - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
stress intensity factor of Semielliptical Surface Crack in internally pressurized hollow cylinder a comparison between bs 7910 and api 579 asme ffs 1 solutions
Materials, 2019Co-Authors: Gabriel De C. Coêlho, Antonio A. Silva, Marco A. Santos, Antonio G. B. Lima, Neilor C. SantosAbstract:The purpose of this research is to compare both British standard BS 7910 (2013) and American standard API 579/ASME FFS-1 (2016) stress intensity factor (SIF) solutions by considering a series of Semielliptical Surface Cracks located in the external Surface of a pressurized hollow cylinder in the axial direction. Finite element analysis was used as a comparison basis for both standards’ SIF results. The solution from the British standard provided consistent results compared to Finite Element (FE) results for Crack depth not much higher than half the thickness in the deepest and Surface-breaking points. Above those limits, the British standard’s solutions diverged quite a lot from the American standard, whose results followed FE values for every Crack depth/thickness ratio tested with a maximum percentage difference of 1.83%.
-
Stress Intensity Factor of Semielliptical Surface Crack in Internally Pressurized Hollow Cylinder—A Comparison between BS 7910 and API 579/ASME FFS-1 Solutions
MDPI AG, 2019Co-Authors: Gabriel De C. Coêlho, Antonio A. Silva, Marco A. Santos, Antonio G. B. Lima, Neilor C. SantosAbstract:The purpose of this research is to compare both British standard BS 7910 (2013) and American standard API 579/ASME FFS-1 (2016) stress intensity factor (SIF) solutions by considering a series of Semielliptical Surface Cracks located in the external Surface of a pressurized hollow cylinder in the axial direction. Finite element analysis was used as a comparison basis for both standards’ SIF results. The solution from the British standard provided consistent results compared to Finite Element (FE) results for Crack depth not much higher than half the thickness in the deepest and Surface-breaking points. Above those limits, the British standard’s solutions diverged quite a lot from the American standard, whose results followed FE values for every Crack depth/thickness ratio tested with a maximum percentage difference of 1.83%
Gabriel De C. Coêlho - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
stress intensity factor of Semielliptical Surface Crack in internally pressurized hollow cylinder a comparison between bs 7910 and api 579 asme ffs 1 solutions
Materials, 2019Co-Authors: Gabriel De C. Coêlho, Antonio A. Silva, Marco A. Santos, Antonio G. B. Lima, Neilor C. SantosAbstract:The purpose of this research is to compare both British standard BS 7910 (2013) and American standard API 579/ASME FFS-1 (2016) stress intensity factor (SIF) solutions by considering a series of Semielliptical Surface Cracks located in the external Surface of a pressurized hollow cylinder in the axial direction. Finite element analysis was used as a comparison basis for both standards’ SIF results. The solution from the British standard provided consistent results compared to Finite Element (FE) results for Crack depth not much higher than half the thickness in the deepest and Surface-breaking points. Above those limits, the British standard’s solutions diverged quite a lot from the American standard, whose results followed FE values for every Crack depth/thickness ratio tested with a maximum percentage difference of 1.83%.
-
Stress Intensity Factor of Semielliptical Surface Crack in Internally Pressurized Hollow Cylinder—A Comparison between BS 7910 and API 579/ASME FFS-1 Solutions
MDPI AG, 2019Co-Authors: Gabriel De C. Coêlho, Antonio A. Silva, Marco A. Santos, Antonio G. B. Lima, Neilor C. SantosAbstract:The purpose of this research is to compare both British standard BS 7910 (2013) and American standard API 579/ASME FFS-1 (2016) stress intensity factor (SIF) solutions by considering a series of Semielliptical Surface Cracks located in the external Surface of a pressurized hollow cylinder in the axial direction. Finite element analysis was used as a comparison basis for both standards’ SIF results. The solution from the British standard provided consistent results compared to Finite Element (FE) results for Crack depth not much higher than half the thickness in the deepest and Surface-breaking points. Above those limits, the British standard’s solutions diverged quite a lot from the American standard, whose results followed FE values for every Crack depth/thickness ratio tested with a maximum percentage difference of 1.83%
Antonio G. B. Lima - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
stress intensity factor of Semielliptical Surface Crack in internally pressurized hollow cylinder a comparison between bs 7910 and api 579 asme ffs 1 solutions
Materials, 2019Co-Authors: Gabriel De C. Coêlho, Antonio A. Silva, Marco A. Santos, Antonio G. B. Lima, Neilor C. SantosAbstract:The purpose of this research is to compare both British standard BS 7910 (2013) and American standard API 579/ASME FFS-1 (2016) stress intensity factor (SIF) solutions by considering a series of Semielliptical Surface Cracks located in the external Surface of a pressurized hollow cylinder in the axial direction. Finite element analysis was used as a comparison basis for both standards’ SIF results. The solution from the British standard provided consistent results compared to Finite Element (FE) results for Crack depth not much higher than half the thickness in the deepest and Surface-breaking points. Above those limits, the British standard’s solutions diverged quite a lot from the American standard, whose results followed FE values for every Crack depth/thickness ratio tested with a maximum percentage difference of 1.83%.
-
Stress Intensity Factor of Semielliptical Surface Crack in Internally Pressurized Hollow Cylinder—A Comparison between BS 7910 and API 579/ASME FFS-1 Solutions
MDPI AG, 2019Co-Authors: Gabriel De C. Coêlho, Antonio A. Silva, Marco A. Santos, Antonio G. B. Lima, Neilor C. SantosAbstract:The purpose of this research is to compare both British standard BS 7910 (2013) and American standard API 579/ASME FFS-1 (2016) stress intensity factor (SIF) solutions by considering a series of Semielliptical Surface Cracks located in the external Surface of a pressurized hollow cylinder in the axial direction. Finite element analysis was used as a comparison basis for both standards’ SIF results. The solution from the British standard provided consistent results compared to Finite Element (FE) results for Crack depth not much higher than half the thickness in the deepest and Surface-breaking points. Above those limits, the British standard’s solutions diverged quite a lot from the American standard, whose results followed FE values for every Crack depth/thickness ratio tested with a maximum percentage difference of 1.83%
Marco A. Santos - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
stress intensity factor of Semielliptical Surface Crack in internally pressurized hollow cylinder a comparison between bs 7910 and api 579 asme ffs 1 solutions
Materials, 2019Co-Authors: Gabriel De C. Coêlho, Antonio A. Silva, Marco A. Santos, Antonio G. B. Lima, Neilor C. SantosAbstract:The purpose of this research is to compare both British standard BS 7910 (2013) and American standard API 579/ASME FFS-1 (2016) stress intensity factor (SIF) solutions by considering a series of Semielliptical Surface Cracks located in the external Surface of a pressurized hollow cylinder in the axial direction. Finite element analysis was used as a comparison basis for both standards’ SIF results. The solution from the British standard provided consistent results compared to Finite Element (FE) results for Crack depth not much higher than half the thickness in the deepest and Surface-breaking points. Above those limits, the British standard’s solutions diverged quite a lot from the American standard, whose results followed FE values for every Crack depth/thickness ratio tested with a maximum percentage difference of 1.83%.
-
Stress Intensity Factor of Semielliptical Surface Crack in Internally Pressurized Hollow Cylinder—A Comparison between BS 7910 and API 579/ASME FFS-1 Solutions
MDPI AG, 2019Co-Authors: Gabriel De C. Coêlho, Antonio A. Silva, Marco A. Santos, Antonio G. B. Lima, Neilor C. SantosAbstract:The purpose of this research is to compare both British standard BS 7910 (2013) and American standard API 579/ASME FFS-1 (2016) stress intensity factor (SIF) solutions by considering a series of Semielliptical Surface Cracks located in the external Surface of a pressurized hollow cylinder in the axial direction. Finite element analysis was used as a comparison basis for both standards’ SIF results. The solution from the British standard provided consistent results compared to Finite Element (FE) results for Crack depth not much higher than half the thickness in the deepest and Surface-breaking points. Above those limits, the British standard’s solutions diverged quite a lot from the American standard, whose results followed FE values for every Crack depth/thickness ratio tested with a maximum percentage difference of 1.83%
Antonio A. Silva - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
stress intensity factor of Semielliptical Surface Crack in internally pressurized hollow cylinder a comparison between bs 7910 and api 579 asme ffs 1 solutions
Materials, 2019Co-Authors: Gabriel De C. Coêlho, Antonio A. Silva, Marco A. Santos, Antonio G. B. Lima, Neilor C. SantosAbstract:The purpose of this research is to compare both British standard BS 7910 (2013) and American standard API 579/ASME FFS-1 (2016) stress intensity factor (SIF) solutions by considering a series of Semielliptical Surface Cracks located in the external Surface of a pressurized hollow cylinder in the axial direction. Finite element analysis was used as a comparison basis for both standards’ SIF results. The solution from the British standard provided consistent results compared to Finite Element (FE) results for Crack depth not much higher than half the thickness in the deepest and Surface-breaking points. Above those limits, the British standard’s solutions diverged quite a lot from the American standard, whose results followed FE values for every Crack depth/thickness ratio tested with a maximum percentage difference of 1.83%.
-
Stress Intensity Factor of Semielliptical Surface Crack in Internally Pressurized Hollow Cylinder—A Comparison between BS 7910 and API 579/ASME FFS-1 Solutions
MDPI AG, 2019Co-Authors: Gabriel De C. Coêlho, Antonio A. Silva, Marco A. Santos, Antonio G. B. Lima, Neilor C. SantosAbstract:The purpose of this research is to compare both British standard BS 7910 (2013) and American standard API 579/ASME FFS-1 (2016) stress intensity factor (SIF) solutions by considering a series of Semielliptical Surface Cracks located in the external Surface of a pressurized hollow cylinder in the axial direction. Finite element analysis was used as a comparison basis for both standards’ SIF results. The solution from the British standard provided consistent results compared to Finite Element (FE) results for Crack depth not much higher than half the thickness in the deepest and Surface-breaking points. Above those limits, the British standard’s solutions diverged quite a lot from the American standard, whose results followed FE values for every Crack depth/thickness ratio tested with a maximum percentage difference of 1.83%
