4.7 Article

Master curve analysis of the Euro fracture toughness dataset

Journal

ENGINEERING FRACTURE MECHANICS
Volume 69, Issue 4, Pages 451-481

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0013-7944(01)00071-6

Keywords

master curve; fracture toughness; brittle fracture; statistical analysis; 22NiMoCr37

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Brittle fracture in the ductile to brittle transition regime is connected with specimen size effects and - more importantly - tremendous scatter of fracture toughness, which the technical community is currently becoming increasingly aware of. The size effects have, the consequence that fracture toughness data obtained from small laboratory specimens do not directly describe the fracture behavior of real flawed structures. Intensive research has been conducted in the last decade in order to overcome these problems. Different approaches have been developed and proposed, one of the most promising being the master curve method, developed at VTT Manufacturing Technology. For validation purposes, a large nuclear grade pressure vessel forging 22NiMoCr37 (A508 C1.2) has been extensively characterized with fracture toughness testing. The tests have been performed on standard geometry CT-specimens having thickness 12.5, 25, 50 and 100 nim. The a/W ratio is close to 0.6 for all specimens. One set of specimens had 20% side-grooves. The obtained data consists of a total of 757 results fulfilling the ESIS-P2 test method validity requirements with respect to pre-fatigue crack shape and the ASTM E-1921 pre-fatigue load. The master curve statistical analysis method is meticulously applied on the data, in order to verify the validity of the method. Based on the analysis it can be concluded that the validity of all the assumptions in the master curve method is confirmed for this material. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available