Figure 1
Visualization of (a) undeformed and (b) deformed cylindrical shells having a circumferential crack having different R/t.
Figure 2
Geometry of cone having crack imperfection subjected to axial compression.
Figure 3
Typical conical shell having 45° crack meshed using suggested meshing technique in the current study with crack length, A = 57 mm.
Figure 4
Experimental setup for axially compressed cone as exemplified for specimen 1.
Figure 5
Experimental and FE predicted axial load against crack percentage for imperfect conical shells with axial crack.
Figure 6
Experimental and FE predicted axial load against crack percentage for imperfect conical shells with circumferential crack.
Figure 7
Experimental and FE predicted axial load against crack percentage for imperfect conical shells with angular crack.
Figure 8
Graph of axial collapse load against crack angle, θ, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 25, having different crack length, A.
Figure 9
Graph of axial collapse load against crack angle, θ, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 250, having different crack length, A.
Figure 10
Graph of axial collapse load against crack angle, θ, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 2000, having different crack length, A.
Figure 11
Graph of axial collapse load against crack length, A, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 25, having different crack angle, θ.
Figure 12
Graph of axial collapse load against crack length, A, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 250, having different crack angle, θ.
Figure 13
Graph of axial collapse load against crack length, A, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 2000, having different crack angle, θ.
Figure 14
Graph of normalized axial collapse load versus crack length, A, for cracked cones with circumferential crack (0°) having different radius-thickness ratio, r1/t.
Figure 15
Graph of normalized axial collapse load versus crack length, A, for cracked cones with angled crack (75°) having different radius-thickness ratio, r1/t.
Figure 16
Graph of axial collapse load against axial shortening for perfect and imperfect cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 25 having circumferential crack.
Figure 17
Graph of axial collapse load against axial shortening for perfect and imperfect cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 250 having circumferential crack.
Figure 18
Graph of axial collapse load deformation curve for perfect and imperfect cone with different thinness ratio having circumferential crack.
Figure 4
Experimental setup for axially compressed cone as exemplified for specimen 1.
Figure 5
Experimental and FE predicted axial load against crack percentage for imperfect conical shells with axial crack.
Figure 6
Experimental and FE predicted axial load against crack percentage for imperfect conical shells with circumferential crack.
Figure 7
Experimental and FE predicted axial load against crack percentage for imperfect conical shells with angular crack.
Figure 8
Graph of axial collapse load against crack angle, θ, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 25, having different crack length, A.
Figure 9
Graph of axial collapse load against crack angle, θ, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 250, having different crack length, A.
Figure 10
Graph of axial collapse load against crack angle, θ, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 2000, having different crack length, A.
Figure 11
Graph of axial collapse load against crack length, A, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 25, having different crack angle, θ.
Figure 12
Graph of axial collapse load against crack length, A, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 250, having different crack angle, θ.
Figure 13
Graph of axial collapse load against crack length, A, for cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 2000, having different crack angle, θ.
Figure 14
Graph of normalized axial collapse load versus crack length, A, for cracked cones with circumferential crack (0°) having different radius-thickness ratio, r1/t.
Figure 15
Graph of normalized axial collapse load versus crack length, A, for cracked cones with angled crack (75°) having different radius-thickness ratio, r1/t.
Figure 16
Graph of axial collapse load against axial shortening for perfect and imperfect cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 25 having circumferential crack.
Figure 17
Graph of axial collapse load against axial shortening for perfect and imperfect cone with thinness ratio, r1/t = 250 having circumferential crack.
Figure 18
Graph of axial collapse load deformation curve for perfect and imperfect cone with different thinness ratio having circumferential crack.