* Corresponding author. Tel.: #44-0207-679-7182; fax: #44-0207-383-0831.

E-mail address: l.etube@meng.ucl.ac.uk (L.S. Etube).

Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583
Review of empirical and semi-empirical > factor
solutions for cracked welded tubular joints
L.S. Etube*, F.P. Brennan, W.D. Dover
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University College London, Torrington Place, London WC1E 7JE, UK
Received 1 April 1999; received in revised form 20 October 1999; accepted 29 November 1999
Abstract
The practical use of fracture mechanics has been established for use on large turbine and
electric generator rotor components used in the atomic power generation and the aircraft
industry. Application areas in the o!shore industry have also been identi"ed. Fracture mechan-
ics is currently used at the design stage of o!shore facilities. It provides the basis for fatigue life
prediction, steel selection and tolerance setting on allowable weld imperfections. Fracture
mechanics is also used during the operational stage of a structure to make important decisions
on inspection scheduling and repair strategies and as a tool for establishing limits on opera-
tional conditions. Linear elastic fracture mechanics relies on the use of the stress intensity factor
concept. The stress intensity factor is a very important fracture mechanics parameter. Therefore,
the accuracy of any fracture mechanics model for the prediction of fatigue crack growth in
o!shore structures for example will depend very much on the accuracy of the stress intensity
factor solution used. Several empirical and semi-empirical solutions have been developed over
the years with varying degrees of accuracy. This paper presents a review of some of these
methods and attempts to assess their accuracy in predicting > factors for welded tubular joints
by comparing predicted results with experimental data obtained from fatigue tests conducted
on large scale welded tubular joints. The experimental results were conducted under simulated
service conditions, using a jack-up o!shore standard load history (JOSH). A comparison
between the experimental and predicted results shows that there may be other factors, which
in#uence fatigue crack growth under variable amplitude conditions. Some of these factors have
been identi"ed and discussed in this paper. 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The S}N approach is used extensively to design welded o!shore tubular joints and
other welded connections for o!shore applications. However, the S}N approach
0951-8339/99/$- see front matter 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 5 1 - 8 3 3 9 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 3 3 - 7
cannot be used in assessing the structural integrity of cracked tubular joints in service.
In this regard fracture mechanics is used and, at present, it is the most powerful and
useful technological tool available for describing and solving fatigue crack problems.
It is also used in practical engineering applications to make important decisions on
inspection scheduling and repair strategies. Fracture mechanics is used as a tool for
establishing limits on operational conditions.
Some of the existing fracture mechanics models, used in the prediction of fatigue
crack growth in o!shore welded tubular joints, are examined in this paper. These fall
in the category of empirical and semi-empirical models and adapted #at plate
solutions based on "nite element analysis. Results obtained from each of these models
are compared with experimental results. The accuracy of these models in the predic-
tion of fatigue crack growth in welded tubular joints under variable amplitude loading
conditions is assessed on the basis of the predicted > factors. Emphasis is placed
on the e!ect of service loading and a consideration of sequence e!ects on the accuracy
of existing models when used for fatigue crack growth prediction in o!shore
structures.
2. The concept of stress intensity factor
Irwin is one of the many researchers who made a great deal of contribution to the
development of fracture mechanics concepts. He extended Gri$th's theory [1] for
ductile materials and postulated that energy due to plastic deformation should be
taken into account in evaluating the energy associated with the creation of a new
crack surface. He also de"ned a quantity, G, the strain energy release rate or `crack
driving forcea, which is the total energy absorbed during cracking per unit increase in
crack length per unit thickness.
Perhaps his most signi"cant contribution came in the mid-1950s [2], when he
showed that the local stresses near the crack tip can be expressed in the form

GH
"
K
(2r
f
GH
()#2, (1)
where r and are the cylindrical co-ordinates of a point with respect to the crack tip
and K is the stress intensity factor.
In general the mode I stress intensity factor for a centre crack of length 2a in an
in"nite plate subjected to a uniform stress "eld, , (Fig. 1) is given by
K"(a. (2)
Eq. (2) gives the stress intensity factor (SIF) in the absence of all boundaries of a form
applicable to the mode of loading and specimen geometry. Cracks in welded tubular
joints are usually in a complex stress "eld. This complex stress "eld is generally
di!erent from the case of a uniform stress in an in"nite plate. SIF solutions for cracks
in tubular welded joints must therefore include various correction functions to
account for boundary e!ects due to loading and specimen and crack geometries. This
566 L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583
Fig. 1. Crack in an in"nite plate subjected to a uniform stress "eld.
leads to a stress intensity factor solution which can be expressed as
K">(a, (3)
where > is the stress intensity factor correction function with the following general
recommended [3] form
>">
Q
>
U
>
C
>
E
>
I
>
K
, (4)
where >
Q
is the correction for a free front surface, >
U
the correction for "nite plate
width, >
C
the correction for crack geometry, >
E
the correction for non-uniform stress
"eld, >
I
the correction for the presence of geometrical discontinuity and >
K
the
correction for changes in structural restraint.
Over the years, di!erent analysis methods have been used to determine the >factors
for cracked tubular welded joints. This has led to the development of several SIF
solutions for semi-elliptical surface cracks. Some of these are empirical and semi-
empirical solutions obtained from experimental results and those based on "nite
element analysis results. This paper presents a review of these methods and compares
their accuracy with experimental results obtained from large-scale tests conducted
under realistic environmental conditions.
3. Experimental results
Calculation of experimental stress intensity factors can be carried out using experi-
mental crack growth data. With the increasing accuracy in the measurement of
L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583 567
experimental fatigue crack growth rates using data from NDT techniques, such as the
alternating current potential di!erence (ACPD) [4], it is possible to determine
experimental > factors with reasonable accuracy. This approach has been used in the
past to develop empirical > factor models.
Fatigue crack growth data obtained from large-scale fatigue tests [5,6] have been
used to determine experimental >-factors. The fatigue tests on >-joints outlined in
Refs. [5,6] were conducted under representative variable amplitude loading condi-
tions using a simulated jack-up o!shore standard load history (JOSH). These experi-
mental values are used as a benchmark for comparing the accuracy of other models
examined. The procedure adopted in determining the experimental > factors is
presented here.
The determination of experimental > factor relies on the use of a suitable crack
growth law such as Paris law
da
dN
"C(K)K, (5)
C"2.72;10`, m"3.532 and K">S(a,
where a is the crack size, K is the stress intensity factor range and S is the hot-spot
stress range. By assuming that Paris law applies, experimental > factors may be
obtained from
>"

1
S(a

(da/dN)
C
K
. (6)
The experimental crack growth rates were determined from the fatigue tests conduc-
ted for this study. These growth rates are similar to those reported in [7] for tests
conducted on single notch bend specimens (SENB) specimens using the same steel.
The experimental crack growth rates were used to calculate the corresponding
> factor curves. These are shown in Figs. 2}5. The irregular nature of the >-factor
curves is due to the variable amplitude nature of the loading sequence and the
resulting retardation e!ects.
The accuracy of the experimental > factors depends on the Paris law material
constants C and m. The C and m values shown above were obtained from compact
tension tests performed on parent plate in air by Creusot Loire Industrie (CLI) [8].
A summary of the data supplied for both parent plate and the heat a!ected zone is
given in Table 1. Where appropriate data are not available it is not recommended to
use arbitrary values from PD 6493 [3] as misleading results can be obtained.
The results from CLI [8] were comparable to those from tests conducted on the
same steel at Cran"eld University [7]. It is important to note that the accuracy of the
experimental > factors presented depends greatly on the values of C and m used in
analysing the experimental results. However these values are sensitive to mean stress
e!ects and often this leads to di!erences in empirical solutions as a result of the scatter
on the C and m values. The data shown in Table 1 were used for comparing
experimental results with those predicted using available > factor models.
568 L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583
Fig. 2. Experimental > factors for >1.
Fig. 3. Experimental > factors for >2.
L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583 569
Fig. 4. Experimental > factors for >3.
Fig. 5. Experimental > factors for >4.
570 L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583
Table 1
Paris law air data for SE 702
C m
Parent metal (PM) 2.715;10" 3.5320
Heat a!ected zone (HAZ) 3.872;10" 3.1687
4. Empirical Y factor solutions
Empirical models have been developed for rapid and accurate analysis of crack
growth data. Some of these models have gained wide acceptance and have been
successfully used in the analysis of fatigue crack growth in tubular welded joints.
These models which include the two phase, the average stress and the modi"ed
average stress models are presented here and their performance is compared with
experimental results.
4.1. Equations of Dover et al.
Irwin's in"nite plate solution predicts that the stress intensity factor at the deepest
point for a semi-elliptical crack is always greater than that at the surface. However, it
has been observed experimentally that, crack growth on the surface may be higher
than crack growth at the root as the crack aspect ratio changes. It was therefore
necessary to derive corrections for the "nite dimension e!ects on the surface cracks in
a semi-in"nite body.
Holdbrook and Dover [9] carried out a series of fatigue tests on #at plate
specimens of "nite dimension containing semi-elliptical cracks in a tensile stress "eld.
This led to the development of equations which accounted for e!ects arising from
"nite cross section area, "nite second moment of area, load eccentricity and any
changes in the position of the neutral axis. These equations were found to provide
good correlation with crack growth data for surface cracks in plates.
Dover and Dharmavasan [10] extended the work to tubular joints using an
experimentally based method for the determination of stress intensity factors of cracks
in tubular joints. The approach adopted was based on a stress intensity factor
expression of the form
K">S(a. (7)
The correction factor > was obtained through the use of an experimental technique.
The values of the correction factors obtained for "ve >, and K joints were used for
this study. Based on the results obtained, the following equation was recommended
for deriving > factors for tubular joints.
>"(1.18!0.32S) '"`""`1'

a
'"`">""'1'
, (8)
L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583 571
where is the chord wall thickness and S is a non-dimensional average stress
parameter. S is the ratio of the average stress concentration factor, SCF
?T
, to the hot
spot stress concentration factor, SCF
&1
, at any location of the joint intersection. It is
given by
S"
SCF
?T
SCF
&1
, (9)
SCF
?T
"
1

"
SCF() d (for axial loading and OPB) and
SCF
?T
"
1

`
`
SCF() d (for IPB),
where OPB and IOB denote out-of-plane and in-plane bending, respectively. This set
of equations assumed that the stress intensity factor only depends on one dimension of
the crack and the average stress concentration factor was taken over the entire joint
intersection instead of over the instantaneous crack length. This made the predictions
of stress intensity correction factors using these equations not to be as accurate as
desired. In a later investigation by Dover and Connolly good predictions were
obtained for crack shape development in plates subjected to bending loads. Other
more accurate models have since been developed by Dover et al. to predict the
> factor. The more recent models are the average stress model [10], the modi"ed
average stress model [11], and the two phase model [12,13] which accounts for size
e!ects on the early growth and the propagation phases of crack extension.
4.2. The average stress model
The average stress (AVS) model [10] was proposed after testing large-scale 16 mm
tubular joints. This model made use of several stress intensity modi"cation (>) factors
and assumed a thickness correction for joints other than 16 mm. The > factor
predicted by this model is given by
>"A

a
H
, (10)
A"0.73!0.18S and j"0.24#0.06S.
This model has been used to predict experimental crack growth rates in tubular
welded joints with discrepancies only occurring during early growth where the crack
depth is less than 25% of the chord wall thickness. The > factor predicted by this
model is compared with experimental results in Fig. 6.
4.3. The two-phase model (TPM)
The two-phase model [13] was based on published crack growth data and
was developed mainly to consider crack growth a!ected by joint size. It is given
572 L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583
Fig. 6. Comparison of experimental > factors with AVS prediction.
in the form
>"M
'
B

a
I
, (11)
where B and k are functions of size and average stress parameter, S, and p is the early
crack growth phase controlling parameter. M
'
is taken as 1 for the propagation phase
(a/'0.25) and (0.25/a)N for the early crack growth phase (a/(0.25).
p"0.231

0.016
`
"`S"`
&1
, B"(0.669!0.1625S)

0.016
"
and k"(0.353#0.057S)

0.016
""""
,
where is the ratio of brace to chord diameter. The early crack growth phase
controlling parameter was produced by assuming that early crack growth behaviour
can be treated as an extrapolation of the propagation phase modi"ed by an exponen-
tially decaying e!ect determined by the wall thickness, the diameter ratio and the
hot-spot stress. It has been argued [11] that the thickness correction exponent which
determines the value of the early crack growth phase controlling parameter, p, is such
that it imposes a very severe dependence of crack growth on thickness. Therefore,
making this model more sensitive to thickness e!ects than has been observed
L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583 573
Fig. 7. Comparison of experimental > factor with TPM prediction.
experimentally. The predicted > factor curve obtained using this model is shown
together with the experimental results in Fig. 7.
4.4. The modixed average stress model
The modi"ed average stress model (MAVS) is the most recent empirical stress
intensity factor solution for cracked tubular welded joints proposed by Austin [11]. It
was proposed after testing large-scale 16 mm tubular joints. It is an extension of the
average stress model and was developed by applying a 15% reduction factor to the
original AVS model. The reduction factor was based on the assumption that rain#ow
cycle counting provided a higher degree of correlation with constant amplitude data
than range counting on which the original AVS model was based. Austin [11]
suggested the 15% reduction factor after noting that the equivalent stress determined
from rain#ow counting was higher than that obtained when simple range counting
was used for the representative double peaked spectrum originally used to develop the
AVS model. This factor was found to be 1.15. A modi"cation to the AVS model was
then proposed based on this di!erence which required that the > factor predicted
by the AVS model be reduced by 15%. The > factor predicted by this model is
given as
>"0.85A

a
H
. (12)
574 L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583
Fig. 8. Comparison of experimental > factor with modi"ed AVS prediction.
All the variables are as de"ned for the AVS model. The degree of accuracy obtainable
from this model depends largely on the accuracy of the original experimental data on
which it is based. Under variable amplitude conditions this may equally be a!ected by
the method of cycle counting used and the detail contained in the crack growth data.
Fig. 8 shows how the results predicted by this > factor model compare with experi-
mental data.
5. Adapted plate solutions
Stress intensity factor solutions for plates cannot be applied directly to tubular
welded joints. This is as a result of the di!erences in the existing boundary conditions.
They are however important in that plate solutions can be used to provide estimates
of stress intensity factors for other geometries by applying the appropriate boundary
correction functions. For instance #at plate solutions may be used to obtain stress
intensity factors for semi-elliptical cracks in -plates by introducing a correction
function to account for the in#uence of the weld detail and the attached plate.
Di!erent researchers have used di!erent approaches over the years to model the
e!ect of the weld detail on the #at plate solutions and develop stress intensity factor
solutions for welded connections. These range from methods based on weight func-
tions to those based on "nite element analysis carried out on welded joints. These
approaches fall within three broad categories of methods generally used to determine
stress intensity factors. These include classical solutions for idealised geometries,
L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583 575
numerical methods and semi-empirical solutions based on a combination of experi-
mental and analytical data. The more widely used of these solutions is that due to
Newman and Raju [14].
5.1. Newman}Raju SIF solution for surface cracks
Newman and Raju (NR) [14] derived a stress intensity factor solution for a semi-
elliptical crack in a #at plate. The proposed solution gave the stress intensity factor for
a surface crack of depth, a, and surface length, 2c, in the form
K
'
">
,0
(a, (13)
>
,0
"
F
K

K
#F
@

, (14)
where F
K
and F
@
are the correction functions for the tension and bending stresses,

K
and
@
, respectively. is an elliptical integral approximated by
"

1#1.464

a
c
'`
.
(15)
The correction functions for tension, F
K
, and for bending, F
@
, are given as
F
K
"

#M
`

a
t
`
#M
`

a
t
"

f
U
and
F
@
"

1#G

a
t
#G
`

a
t
`

M

#M
`

a
t
`
#M
`

a
t
"

f
U
,
where
G

"!1.22!0.12

a
c
, G
`
"0.55!1.05

a
c
"``
#0.47

a
c
`
,
M

"1.13!0.09

a
c
, M
`
"!0.54#

0.89
0.2#(a/c)
,
M
`
"0.5!

1.0
0.65#(a/c)
#14

1.0!

a
c
`"
and f
U
"

sec

c
w
(
a
c
.
The function, f
U
, is the plate width correction function for a plate with a "nite width,
w. Even though this #at plate solution cannot be applied directly to welded tubular
joints, it is very important in that it can be used to provide estimates of stress intensity
factors for other geometries by applying the appropriate boundary correction func-
tions.
The Newman}Raju solution has been shown [15] to yield results which agree
closely with experimental tubular joint >factors for cracks of a/'0.15, by applying
a moment release function to account for the stress redistribution which accompanies
crack propagation in tubular joints.
576 L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583
Di!erent researchers have used di!erent approaches over the years to model the
e!ect of the weld detail and crack geometry on the #at plate solutions and develop
stress intensity factor solutions for use in the analysis of cracks in tubular welded
connections.
A semi-analytical model based on the Newman and Raju #at plate solution for
predicting > factors in welded tubular joints was proposed by Monahan [16]. This
model included the following:
1. A non-uniform stress correction (NSC) to account for weld geometry,
2. A linear moment release (LMR) to account for load shedding and
3. A crack shape correction (CSC) factor to account for the e!ect of crack geometry.
The proposed equation is given by
>
,0>,1!>*+0>!1!
"
(F
K
>
E
(1!B/)#F
@
>
E
(B/)(1!a/t))

, (16)
where >
E
is the non-uniform stress correction factor, is the crack shape correction
factor and B/ is the bending to total stress ratio.
The non-uniformstress correction factor, >
E
, accounts for the in#uence of the stress
concentration produced by the weld detail. This factor can be obtained using
a method proposed by Albrecht and Yamada [17]. Using Albrecht's method, this
factor is given by
>
E
"
2

V
G

sin

x
G>
a
!sin

x
G
a
. (17)
This was derived for a non-uniform stress distribution, (x), that remains symmetrical
about the crack centre line as shown in Fig. 9. The crack dimension, a, used here
corresponds to half the length of a through crack, which is de"ned as the crack depth
for surface cracks as expressed in Eq. (13).
The crack shape correction factor, , introduced by Monahan was included to
account for the in#uence of crack aspect ratio. This factor was obtained by comparing
experimental > factors with those obtained by the Newman and Raju #at plate
solution which included a non-uniformstress correction factor and the linear moment
release model such that
"
>
#VN
>
,0>,1!>*+0
. (18)
Monahan [16] used curve "tting through the values given by Eq. (18) and showed that
could be approximated by the following equations:
"1 for
a
2c
)0.05,
"
1
1#0.7(a/2c!0.05)""
for 0.05(
a
2c
(0.26. (19)
L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583 577
Fig. 9. Schematic illustration of Albrecht's method for determining >
E
[17].
The above crack shape correction factor was derived from experimental data obtained
from tests conducted on a combination of X and multi-braced tubular joints. This
means that it may not be directly applicable to other joint geometries. The reason for
this is that the crack shape evolution curve depends greatly on both the joint geometry
and the mode of loading. This is also demonstrated by the fact that the crack shape
correction factor shown above is unity for the range of crack aspect ratios obtained for
the >-joints tested for this study. It is therefore possible that, a wide range of crack
shape correction factors can be obtained, depending on the geometry of the specimens
tested. This was shown to be the case in a recent study [18] on -joints under axial
loading. Myers [18] used a similar approach adopted by Monahan [16] and obtained
a crack shape correction factor applicable to -joints under axial loading given by
"0.9 for
a
2c
)0.05,
"

1
1#0.7(a/2c!0.04)""
!1 for
a
2c
'0.05. (20)
578 L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583
Fig. 10. Myers' data used in deriving CSC factors for NR solution [17].
The data from which this correction factor was derived are shown in Fig. 10. The "rst
part of the curve can be considered to represent an upper boundary for a/2c)0.05.
However, the crack shape correction factor used for a/2c'0.05, is outside the scatter
band for the data used. This would make it di$cult to use this type of semi-empirically
derived solution for other joint geometries.
The brace and chord thickness of the >-joints used in this study are the same as that
used by Myers [18]. However, both the geometry and mode of the loading are
di!erent. As a result, the crack shape evolution curves obtained from the two studies
are di!erent. This di!erence is shown in Fig. 11 where the best "t curves obtained for
the two geometries are compared. The predicted > factors obtained by using the
correction factors given in Eqs. (19) and (20) are compared in Fig. 12 with the
experimental results from>-joints. The sensitivity of >factors to crack aspect ratio is
due to the semi-empirical nature of the model. As a result, there is some degree of
uncertainty in the applicability of the model to the prediction of > factors for cases
other than those from which the crack shape correction factors were derived. In order
to avoid this uncertainty, a crack shape correction function which also accounts for
the e!ect of joint dimensional parameters and the mode of loading employed needs to
be introduced.
There is a lack of solutions available for predicting crack aspect ratio evolution.
This has been identi"ed [19] to represent the greatest hindrance to good predictions
of remaining life of cracked components. Di!erent researchers have used di!erent
approaches to incorporate the e!ect of crack aspect ratio into stress intensity factor
models used for fatigue crack growth prediction. One approach highlighted by
Brennan [20] is based on the use of a root mean square (RMS) or average stress
intensity factor for the transverse and longitudinal directions of crack growth. Cruse
and Besuner [21] proposed this approach and it has been used by Dedhia and Harris
[22] in the analyses of fatigue cracks in pipes. The use of this method for the
L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583 579
Fig. 11. Comparison of crack shape evolution curves for > and -joints.
prediction of > factors in welded joints is outside the scope of work presented in this
paper and will not be discussed in any further detail. However, a new semi-empirical
model which accounts for the e!ect of crack aspect ratio is required.
6. Further discussion and conclusions
Fig. 13 shows the > factor curves predicted by various existing > factor models.
Those shown in Fig. 13 include the TPM, AVS, modi"ed AVS and the adapted #at
plate solution based on the Newman and Raju equations. As shown in Fig. 13, the
experimental > factors obtained for this study are all below those predicted by the
above equations.
The importance of crack shape evolution in the accurate prediction of crack growth
in cracked components was highlighted in the previous section. The TPM, AVS and
modi"ed AVS models do not account for this e!ect. It is therefore possible that their
accuracy in predicting > factors in tubular welded joints will depend on whether the
crack shape evolution in the welded joint of interest is representative of those
originally used to derive the respective equations. The main reason for this is that both
joint geometry and mode of loading in#uence crack shape evolution.
The prediction of crack aspect ratio has been identi"ed to represent a major source
of uncertainty in the fatigue crack growth prediction. This is mainly as a result of the
large scatter on crack aspect ratio obtainable from experimental data at the current
state of the art in fatigue testing.
The derivation of accurate stress intensity factor solutions is imperative if fatigue
crack growth prediction models are to be reliable. However, there are other important
580 L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583
Fig. 12. Comparison of Myers' and Monahan's solution with >-joint data.
factors which are often ignored, partly due to the lack of su$cient data and partly due
to the inherent di$culty which is often encountered in reducing the level of uncertain-
ty to a reasonable level. One of these factors is the e!ect of variable amplitude loading
and the associated sequence e!ects.
Fatigue crack growth prediction under variable amplitude loading conditions is
still in its infancy. The reason for this is that there is a lack of suitable models, which
account for all the relevant e!ects unique to variable amplitude loading conditions.
The results obtained from the variable amplitude fatigue tests conducted for this
study have been analysed using existing fracture mechanics models. It is apparent that
one of the main di$culties in trying to quantify fatigue crack growth under variable
amplitude loading conditions is the large number of variables involved which almost
always operate together to in#uence fatigue crack growth at any one time. Some of
these variables include material properties determined by the alloying elements
present, the nature of the corrosive environment determined mainly by its chemical
composition and other additional factors. Crack shape evolution has also been
identi"ed as an important parameter, which in#uences the stress intensity factor. At
present, empirical and semi-empirical fatigue crack growth models for the analysis of
fatigue crack growth under variable amplitude conditions are limited. A methodo-
logy, which accounts for the statistical distribution of crack aspect ratio data under
variable amplitude loading conditions, has been developed for the prediction of
> factors in tubular welded joints. This is currently being prepared for publication.
Most of the existing models do not allow for interaction e!ects to be accounted for.
Those that attempt to model interaction e!ects are based on a cycle by cycle analysis
L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583 581
Fig. 13. Comparison of > factors from di!erent models with >-joint data.
with emphasis on single overloads or underloads. This often makes their use on
engineering structures impractical.
References
[1] Gri$th AA. Philos Trans R Soc London 1920;A221:163 (republished with additional commentary in
Trans Am Soc Metals 1968;61:871).
[2] Irwin GR. Analysis of stresses and strains near the end of a crack traversing a plate. Trans ASME
J Appl Mech 1957;E24:361.
[3] BS PD 6493. Guidance on methods for assessing the acceptability of #aws in welded structures.
London: British Standards Institution, 1991.
[4] Technical Software Consultants Ltd. ACFM crack microguage * model U10, user manual. Milton
Keynes, April 1991.
[5] Etube LS, Myers P, Brennan FP, Dover WD, Stacey A. Constant and variable amplitude corrosion
fatigue performance of a high strength jack-up steel. International O!shore and Polar Engineering
Conference, Montreal, Canada, May 1998.
[6] Etube LS. Variable amplitude corrosion fatigue and fracture mechanics of high strength weldable
high strength steels. PhD Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University College Lon-
don, September 1998.
[7] Billingham J, Spurier J, Healy J, Kilgallon P. Corrosion fatigue fracture mechanics of jack-up steels.
Project Report, University of Cran"eld, 1998.
[8] Balladon P, Coudert E. TPG 500 structural assessment. Rapport Technique 95072 C, September
1995.
[9] Holdbrook SJ, Dover WD. The stress intensity factors for a deep surface crack in a "nite plate. Eng
Fracture Mech 1979;12:347}64.
582 L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583
[10] Dover WD, Dharmavasan S. Fatigue fracture mechanics analysis of and >joints. Paper OTC 4404
of O!shore Technology Conference, TX, 1982.
[11] Austin JA. The role of corrosion fatigue crack growth mechanisms in predicting fatigue life of o!shore
tubular joints. PhD Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University College London,
October 1994.
[12] Kam JCP, Topp DA, Dover WD. Fracture mechanics modelling and structural integrity of welded
tubular joints in fatigue. Proceedings of the Sixth International O!shore Mechanics and Arctic
Engineering Symposium. ASME 1987;3:395}402.
[13] Kam JC. Structural integrity of o!shore tubular joints subject to fatigue. PhD Thesis, Department of
Mechanical Engineering, University College London, 1989.
[14] Newman JC, Raju IS. An empirical stress intensity factor equation for the surface crack: Engng
Fracture Mech 1981;15(1}2):185}92.
[15] Aaghaakouchak A, Glinka G, Dharmavasan S. A load shedding model for fracture mechanics
analysis of fatigue cracks in tubular joints. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on
O!shore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, The Hague, 1989.
[16] Monahan CC. Early fatigue crack growth in o!shore structure. PhD Thesis, Department of Mechan-
ical Engineering, University College London, May 1994.
[17] Albrecht P, Yamada K. Rapid calculation of stress intensity factors. J Struct Div ASCE
1977;103:377}89.
[18] Myers P. Corrosion fatigue fracture mechanics of high strength jack up steels. PhD Thesis, Depart-
ment of Mechanical Engineering, University College London, 1998.
[19] Brennan FP. Fatigue and fracture-discussion. in: Moan T, Berge S, editors. Proceedings of the 13th
International Ship and O!shore Structures Congress, vol. 3, ISBN 0-08-042829-0, 1997.
[20] Brennan FP, Dover WD. Fatigue and fracture mechanics assessment models for RODS: RODS
(Primer), Final Report June 1998, University College London.
[21] Cruse TA, Besuner PM. Residual life prediction for surface cracks in complex structural details. J of
Aircraft 1975;12(4):369}75.
[22] Dedhia DD, Harris DO. Improved in#uence functions for part circumferential cracks in pipes. ASME
Pressure Vessel and Piping Conference, Portland, Oregon, June 1983.
L.S. Etube et al. / Marine Structures 12 (1999) 565}583 583