4.7 Article

Creep damage characterization using non-linear ultrasonic techniques

期刊

ACTA MATERIALIA
卷 58, 期 6, 页码 2079-2090

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.actamat.2009.11.050

关键词

Non-linear ultrasonic; Second order harmonics; Third order harmonics; Creep damage; Copper

资金

  1. DMRL, Hyderabad

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper describes the use of non-linear ultrasonic techniques for the characterization of material degradation in 99.98% pure copper due to high-temperature creep. Flat dog-bone-shaped specimens were subjected to constant load creep testing at different stress and temperature levels. Creep damage progression was monitored by conducting continuous and interrupted mode creep tests. In the case of continuous loading non-linear ultrasonic (NLU) measurements were conducted after fracture at different locations along the gage length of the sample. For interrupted tests the NLU measurements were conducted on different creep life fractions, through periodic interruption of the creep test. In all cases a through transmission NLU measurement technique was employed. Three different non-linear measurements, namely static displacement, second harmonic and third harmonic, were taken and their responses compared. The NLU measurements were found to be significantly sensitive to the extent of creep damage (similar to 200-2500% of base level), while the linear ultrasonic measurements, representing the change in longitudinal velocities, were only in the range 10-30% for a comparable creep damage level. NLU measurements carried out on fractured samples suggest that the NLU response was locally high at locations where the creep damage was concentrated, compared with other locations, even within the gage length of the specimen. This was confirmed using micrograph observations. Of the three non-linear measurements, the third harmonic data was most sensitive to creep damage. (C) 2009 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据