Issue 53

A. Chatzigeorgiou et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 53 (2020) 306-324; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.53.24 317 P 800 N W 50 mm B (plate thickness) 0.5 mm α 5 mm H 75 mm E (modulus of elasticity) 206 000 MPa v 0.3 Table 3: Plate characteristics. Ki Analytical method   MPa mm K I 150.1 K II 50.6 Table 4: Results from the calculation of the analytical method. Figure 14: Example with two contours. In Fig.15 are shown the results from the calculations of K I and K II using FEMAP, and in Tab. 5 are shown the differences of the calculated SIFs from FEMAP and the values from the analytical method. Figure 15: Results from the calculations of K I and K II using FEMAP by changing the number of contours. It is observed from Tab. 5, that the smallest percentage error, for K I is 0.90% and it is with one concentric circle, and for K II is 4.92% it is with two contours. Verification of the trajectory of the crack. For the verification of the trajectory of the crack, three specimens with holes, with different length and position of the crack were used, from an experimental procedure that took place at Cornell University [30]. These specimens were