<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Through-Wall Crack on MechCalc Resources</title>
    <link>https://mechcalc.net/blog/en/tags/through-wall-crack/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Through-Wall Crack on MechCalc Resources</description>
    
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 14:00:00 +0800</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://mechcalc.net/blog/en/tags/through-wall-crack/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>FITNET SSTP10: FAD Assessment of a Through-Thickness Crack Under Ductile Tearing</title>
      <link>https://mechcalc.net/blog/en/engineering/bs7910/bs7910-sstp10-fad-walkthrough/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 14:00:00 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid>https://mechcalc.net/blog/en/engineering/bs7910/bs7910-sstp10-fad-walkthrough/</guid>
      <description>FITNET&amp;#39;s SSTP10 worked example — a welded stainless-steel wide plate with a through-thickness crack failing by ductile tearing. This post works out the assessment point in mechCalc&amp;#39;s BS 7910 Clause 7 fracture assessment calculator (the calculator does not do a ductile tearing analysis, so K_mat is converted point by point and entered directly), shows where it lands on the Failure Assessment Diagram, and compares it point by point with FITNET: the horizontal coordinate L_r is close to the literature (0.511 vs 0.51), while the vertical coordinate K_r cannot be compared directly because the source includes an unquantified welding residual stress.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
