Search

Abstract Information on flaw size, shape, location and interaction with the neighbouring flaws is essential to the fitness for service assessment or engineering critical assessments of components with crack-like flaws. In 2013 edition of BS 7910 the flaw interaction criteria was systematically decoupled into alignment of non co-planar flaws and combination of co-planar flaws. The alignment criteria is unchanged from the earlier edition of the BS 7910 and is based on comparing the crack tip separation with the average flaw heights. The criteria for combination of two in-plane co-planar flaws has been updated for fracture driven modes such that interacting flaws are no longer allowed to touch and are now based on the flaw height for the long shallow (a/c < 1) flaws, where a is flaw height and c is half flaw length The paper summarises the background to the flaw interaction rules, the rationale behind the updated criteria for flaw interaction and charts the way forward for further developments in flaw interaction criteria. Highlights • Summary of the history of changes to the flaw interaction rules in BS 7910. • Technical justification for the changes made in the 2013 edition (incorporating addendum A1 and corrigendum C1,C2). • Definition of remaining gaps. • A case study example of use of the rules. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract The UK procedure for fracture mechanics-based assessment of flaws (BS 7910) was extensively updated in late 2013. This paper outlines how and why the clauses and Annexes relating to residual stresses (in particular those arising from the manufacturing of welded joints) have been expanded, and explains the origin and extent of validation of the information. A worked example of applying the guidance to fracture assessment of a welded joint is included. Highlights • Annex Q of BS 7910:2013 contains updated upper-bound residual stress profiles for a range of different weld configurations. • Information is given in the form of both equations and graphs, improving its user-friendliness compared with the earlier revision. • Two new K -solutions have been added, allowing users to translate the stress distribution into a secondary stress intensity factor. • A simplified method of calculating K I s is given, based on resolving the stress distribution into membrane, bending and self-balancing components. • A case study illustrates the different ways in which K I s can be calculated for a welded joint. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Court liaison and diversion services come in a variety of forms, but the similarities and differences between these services are not well characterized. Findings from a six-year audit of the Newcastle (Australia) Mental Health Court Liaison (MHCL) service are reported, including client characteristics, offence and service contact profiles, court outcomes, and interrelationships among these variables. During the audit period, there were 2383 service episodes by 1858 clients (1478 males, 380 females). Drug and alcohol disorders (40.9%) and psychotic disorders (17.0%) were the most prevalent mental health problems, while assault (23.1%), theft (23.1%), offences against justice procedures (15.4%), driving offences (13.4%) and malicious damage to property (8.3%) were the most frequently recorded charges. Among service episodes with a finalized court outcome, 70.0% involved a punishment (bond: 49.5%; jail term: 29.7%). Females were less likely to be punished, but more likely to have their case dismissed under sections of the relevant Act that required further assessment and monitoring. Being married, or having an adjustment or drug and alcohol disorder, were also associated with an increased likelihood of punishment, while clients with a psychotic or bipolar disorder were less likely to be punished. Among clients who were punished, those referred from inpatient mental health services were more likely to receive a non-jail punishment, while unemployed clients were more likely to be jailed. A substantial proportion of clients had court outcomes that required an ongoing involvement with local mental health services. By being part of community mental health services, our MHCL service is able to work efficiently and effectively with the criminal justice system, while facilitating ready access to existing mental health services and continuation of care. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

In 2015, the University of Manchester hosted a workshop ('Mind the Gap') aimed at identifying gaps in a number of structural integrity fitness-for-service procedures, including R5, R6, BS 7910 and API/ASME. The findings were subsequently summarised in a journal paper and shared with the relevant stakeholders. A second workshop, this time hosted by the University of Bristol in 2017, was intended to build on the findings of the earlier event, identifying which gaps had been filled, which remain and whether new ones have been identified in the meantime. 'Mind the Gap 2' was wide-ranging, including consideration of failure by fracture, fatigue crack growth, hightemperature creep and environmentally assisted crack growth, along with the use of innovative techniques to follow the progress of crack growth from the atomic to the macroscopic scale. A summary of the whole event is thus outside the scope of a single paper, so here we concentrate mainly on advances in fracture assessment, on the interface between inspection and ECA, and on how developments are being incorporated into structural integrity procedures. There is a particular emphasis on the energy transition in the UK, where the planned energy mix will include both nuclear power and offshore wind. • Interface between non-destructive testing and structural integrity assessment. • Inspection and assessment of non-sharp defects. • Codes and standards for future reactor systems. • Enhancements to fracture assessment procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]