Journal of Marine Science and Technology

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 102–112 | Cite as

Fatigue crack propagation and computational remaining life assessment of ship structures

Original Articles


The fitness for serviceability of structural members of marine structures in which fatigue cracks might be found during in-service inspection is investigated in order to prevent instantaneous failures of ships, as well as a loss of serviceability such as the oil- and/or watertightness of critical compartments. The essential features of fatigue crack propagation and the remaining life assessment are discussed in the first part of the paper, where the effects of weldment, complicated stress distributions including stress biaxialities at three-dimensional structural joints, structural redundancy, and crack curving are found to be of primary importance. The second part of the paper contains a discussion of an advanced numerical simulation method for the remaining life assessment, in which the above-mentioned effects of fatigue crack propagation are taken into account. The simulated crack paths and the fatigue crack propagation lives are found to be in fairly good agreement with the experimental results.

Key words

ship structures fatigue crack propagation remaining life assessment computer simulation welding residual stress structural redundancy blaxial stress crack curving 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Tomita Y, Toyosada M, Sumi Y et al (1994) Fatigue crack propagation in ship structures. In: Carpinteri A (ed) Handbook of fatigue crack propagation in metallic structures vol 2. Elsevier, Amsterdam, chap 44, pp 1609–1642Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marine Board (1997) Prevention of fracture in ship structures. National Academy of Sciences, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sumi Y, Chen Y, Hayashi S (1996) Morphological aspects of fatigue crack propagation. Part I. Computational procedure. Int J Fracture 82:205–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sumi Y, Chen Y, Wang ZN (1996) Morphological aspects of fatigue crack propagation. Part II. Effects of stress biaxiality and welding residual stress. Int J Fracture 82:221–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mizukami T, Ishikawa I, Yuasa M (1994) Trends of recent hull damage and counter-measures. Class NK Tech Bull 12:25–45MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cervetto D, Das PK, Hakala M et al (1994) Committee II.1 Report: Quasi-static load effects. In: Jeffrey NE, Kendrick AM (eds) Proceedings of the 12th International Ship and Offshore Structures Congress, vol 1, St. John's, pp 151–231Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sumi Y, Cervetto D, Das PK et al (1996) Two-phase finite element comparative study of a side structure of a middle size tanker. Mar Struct 9:151–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sumi Y, Bacicchi G, Das PK et al (1997) Committee II.1 Report: Quasi-static response. In: Moan T, Berge S (eds) Proceedings of the 13th International Ship and Offshore Structures Congress, vol 1. Pergamon-Elsevier, Oxford, pp 123–186Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    WES 2805 (1994) Method of assessment of defects in fusion welded joints with respect to instantaneous failure. Japan Welding Engineering Society, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Newman JC Jr, Raju IS (1981) Stress intensity factor equations for cracks in three-dimensional finite bodies. NASA Technical Memorandum 83200, pp 1–49Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Murakami Y (ed) (1987) Stress intensity factors handbook, vols 1–2. Pergamon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carpinteri A (1994) Propagation of surface cracks under cyclic loading. In: Handbook of fatigue crack propagation in metallic structures, vol 1, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 653–705Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shiratori M, Miyoshi T, Tanikawa K (1986) Analysis of stress intensity factors for surface cracks subjected to arbitrarily distributed surface stresses (in Japanese). Trans JSME A52–474:390–398Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Iino N, Ushirokawa O, Neki I et al (1992) Study on fatigue strength of 50HT steel with wrap-around weld (in Japanese). J Soc Nav Archit Jpn 171:437–448Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maddox SJ, Andrews RM (1990) Stress intensity factors for weld toe cracks. Presented at Localised Damage 90, June 26–28, 1990, PortsmouthGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sumi Y, Bozic Z, Iyama H et al (1996) Multiple fatigue cracks propagating in a stiffened panel J Soc Nav Archit Jpn 179:407–412Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sumi Y (1990) Computational crack path prediction for brittle fracture in welding residual stress fields. Int J Fracture 44:189–207Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yerry MA, Shephard MS (1983) A modified quad-tree approach to finite element generation. IEEE Comput Graphics Appl Jan/Feb: 39–46Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yamamoto Y, Tokuda N (1973) Determination of stress intensity factors in cracked plates by the finite element method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 6:427–439MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sumi Y, Nemat-Nasser S, Keer LM (1983) On crack branching and curving in a finite body. Int J Fracture 21:67–79; (1984) Erratum, Int J Fracture 24:159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Amestoy M, Leblond JB (1992) Crack paths in planar situations. II. Detailed form of the expansion of the stress intensity factors. Int J Solids Struct 29:465–501MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kitagawa H, Yuuki R, Tohgo K (1981) Fatigue crack growth under combined modes of stress intensity factors (in Japanese). Trans JSME A47–424:1283–1292Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kato A, Kurihara M, Kawahara M (1983) An expression of fatigue crack propagation rates under wide-ranged stress ratios (in Japanese). J Soc Nav Archit Jpn 153:336–343Google Scholar

Copyright information

© SNAJ 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. Sumi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean EngineeringYokohama National UniversityYokohamaJapan

Personalised recommendations