1-20 of 31080
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account

Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Close Modal
Sort by
Journal Articles
Accepted Manuscript
Article Type: Technical Briefs
J. Pressure Vessel Technol.
Paper No: PVT-20-1271
Published Online: July 21, 2021
Image
Example of cracks in corrosion (CIC) in a pipeline [ 7 ] (Reprinted with pe...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 1 Example of cracks in corrosion (CIC) in a pipeline [ 7 ] (Reprinted with permission from Elsevier (©) 2012) Example of cracks in corrosion (CIC) in a pipeline [7] (Reprinted with permission from Elsevier (©) 2012) More
Image
Image
Comparison of corrosion profiles predicted by RSTRENG and modified B31G  [ ...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 3 Comparison of corrosion profiles predicted by RSTRENG and modified B31G [ 12 ] Comparison of corrosion profiles predicted by RSTRENG and modified B31G [12] More
Image
Detailed mesh near the crack-tip field ( d  cr  = 10% d T  )   Detailed mes...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 4 Detailed mesh near the crack-tip field ( d cr  = 10% d T ) Detailed mesh near the crack-tip field (dcr = 10%dT) More
Image
( a ) Half model of the pipe with boundary conditions and ( b ) a typical X...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 5 ( a ) Half model of the pipe with boundary conditions and ( b ) a typical XFEM mesh (a) Half model of the pipe with boundary conditions and (b) a typical XFEM mesh More
Image
Stress–strain curves constructed from Ramberg–Osgood equation [ 14 ]   Stre...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 6 Stress–strain curves constructed from Ramberg–Osgood equation [ 14 ] Stress–strain curves constructed from Ramberg–Osgood equation [14] More
Image
Comparison between XFEM, experimental, and FEA results for CIC modeling. FE...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 7 Comparison between XFEM, experimental, and FEA results for CIC modeling. FEA and experimental results were reported by Ma et al. [ 14 ]. Comparison between XFEM, experimental, and FEA results for CIC modeling. FEA and experimental results were reported by Ma et al. [14]. More
Image
Image
Failure pressure for different CIC defects with varying  d  cr  /d T   rati...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 9 Failure pressure for different CIC defects with varying d cr /d T ratio ( d T  = 60% WT) Failure pressure for different CIC defects with varying dcr/dT ratio (dT = 60% WT) More
Image
Failure pressure for CIC defects with varying  d  cr  /d T   ratio (when th...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 10 Failure pressure for CIC defects with varying d cr /d T ratio (when the defect lengths were twice the original value) Failure pressure for CIC defects with varying dcr/dT ratio (when the defect lengths were twice the original value) More
Image
( a ) the relationship between the pressure and the crack length extension ...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 11 ( a ) the relationship between the pressure and the crack length extension and ( b ) the relationship between the pressure and the crack depth extension (based on X42 material) (a) the relationship between the pressure and the crack length extension and (b) the relationship between the p... More
Image
Comparison between XFEM, experimental, and FEA results for CIC modeling. FE...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 12 Comparison between XFEM, experimental, and FEA results for CIC modeling. FEA and experimental results were reported by Ma et al. [ 14 ]. Comparison between XFEM, experimental, and FEA results for CIC modeling. FEA and experimental results were reported by Ma et al. [14]. More
Image
Failure pressure for CIC defects with varying  d  cr  /d T   ratio ( d T   ...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 13 Failure pressure for CIC defects with varying d cr /d T ratio ( d T  = 55%WT) Failure pressure for CIC defects with varying dcr/dT ratio (dT = 55%WT) More
Image
( a ) Test section with induction heating coil, ( b ) LEPEL induction heati...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 1 ( a ) Test section with induction heating coil, ( b ) LEPEL induction heating system, and ( c ) close view of induction heating coil and specimen and high-temperature extensometer location (a) Test section with induction heating coil, (b) LEPEL induction heating system, and (c) close view... More
Image
Environmental test loop showing different subsystems   Environmental test l...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 2 Environmental test loop showing different subsystems Environmental test loop showing different subsystems More
Image
S–S curve of RT-T03 and ET-T05 tensile tests plotted in ( a ) full strain r...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 3 S–S curve of RT-T03 and ET-T05 tensile tests plotted in ( a ) full strain range and ( b ) strain range of up to 0.6% S–S curve of RT-T03 and ET-T05 tensile tests plotted in (a) full strain range and (b) strain range of up to 0.6% More
Image
( a ) Measured engineering maximum/minimum stress and ( b ) strain range of...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 4 ( a ) Measured engineering maximum/minimum stress and ( b ) strain range of fatigue testing cases (a) Measured engineering maximum/minimum stress and (b) strain range of fatigue testing cases More
Image
Estimated mechanical properties for fatigue testing cases from    N  =  1  ...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 5 Estimated mechanical properties for fatigue testing cases from N = 1 to N = N f , ( a ) elastic modulus, ( b ) stress at elastic limit, and nonlinear Chaboche parameters ( c ) C 1 , and ( d ) γ 1 Estimated mechanical properties for fatigue testing cases ... More
Image
Reference tensile test S–S curve and reconstructed S–S curve using Chaboche...
Published Online: July 19, 2021
Fig. 6 Reference tensile test S–S curve and reconstructed S–S curve using Chaboche model for fatigue testing cases of ( a ) RT-F08, ( b ) ET-F07, ( c ) ET-F17, and ( d ) EN-F18 Reference tensile test S–S curve and reconstructed S–S curve using Chaboche model for fatigue testing cases of (a) RT-F... More