182 J. Gosliga et al. Table 17.3 List of joints and their properties for Turbine 1 Joint designations for Turbine 1 Joint ID Element set Coordinate Type Disp. DoF Rot. DoF 1 A, D 8, 15, 235.75 Bearing [x, y, z] [y, z] 2 B, D 8, 14, 254 Bearing [x, y, z] [y, z] 3 D, E 10, 15, 253 Bearing [x, y, z] [y, z] 4 D, C 8, 16, 254 Bearing [x, y, z] [x, y] 5 E, F 15, 15, 250 Bearing [x, y, z] [x, y] 6 F, G 15, 15, 183 Bolted – – 7 G, H 15, 15, 105 Bolted – – 8 H, I 15, 15, 5 Bolted – – 9 I, 1 15, 15, 0 Soil – – Table 17.4 List of joints and their properties for Aeroplane 1 Joint designations for Aeroplane 1 Joint ID Element set Coordinate Type Disp. DoF Rot. DoF 1 A1, A2 34.2, 14.68, 5.165 Perfect – – 2 A2, A3 34.2, 60.96, 5.165 Perfect – – 3 A2, B 32.2, 29.79, 2.89 Lug – – 4 B, C 13.2, 42.67, 4.74 Complex – – 5 C, D 13.2, 40.17, 4.74 Complex – – 6 B, E 23.2, 30.79, 3.57 Complex – – 7 E, F 23.2, 28.29, 3.57 Complex – – 8 A2, G 36.2, 29.79, 2.89 Lug – – 9 G, H 45.2, 30.79, 3.57 Complex – – 10 H, I 45.2, 28.29, 3.57 Complex – – 11 G, J 55.2, 42.67, 4.74 Complex – – 12 J, K 55.2, 40.17, 4.74 Complex – – 13 A3, L 33.2, 68.58, 7.55 Lug – – 14 A3,M 35.2, 68.58, 7.55 Lug – – 15 A3, N 34.2, 64.58, 9.16 Lug – – 16 A1, O 34.2, 7.75, 1.75 Complex – – 17 A2, P 34.2, 29.67, 1.75 Complex – – 18 O, 1 34.2, 7.75, 0 Plane [z] [x, y] 19 P, 1 34.2, 29.67, 0 Plane [z] [x, y] information on materials used will be available for each structure. The coarsest level of detail will be the material class (ceramics, metals). The next level of detail will be a specific description of the material within the class, for example brass and steel belong to the material class of metals. The finest level of detail will be the specific properties of the material, for example Young’s Modulus and density. Material grade may also form part of the attributes. Once again, to be confident of an exact match between two structures, all of the material properties must be known down to the bottom of the hierarchy, otherwise there will be a degree of uncertainty. The material properties determine whether it is possilbe to make inferences using damage assessment and classification labels between two structures. Two materials of the same material class will experience similar failure modes, and could be expected to exhibit a similar response to a particular type of damage giving more confidence in the classification of damage. However, to build confidence that the assessment (extent) of the damage will be the same between two structures, the material would ideally be the same. For example, aluminium and steel will both suffer corrosion (damage classification), but there is little guarantee that the change in material properties will be the same for the same extent of corrosion. If the materials are identical, then transferring damage assessment and classification labels is trivial.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTMzNzEzMQ==