iTeh StandardsiTeh Standards
EURUSD
Your shopping cart is empty.
ASTM

ASTM E338-03

(Test Method)

Standard Test Method of Sharp-Notch Tension Testing of High-Strength Sheet Materials (Withdrawn 2010)

Standard Test Method of Sharp-Notch Tension Testing of High-Strength Sheet Materials (Withdrawn 2010)

SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers the determination of a comparative measure of the resistance of sheet materials to unstable fracture originating from a very sharp stress-concentrator or crack. It relates specifically to fracture under continuously increasing force and excludes conditions of applying force that produce creep or fatigue. The quantity determined is the sharp-notch strength of a specimen of particular dimensions, and this value depends upon these dimensions as well as the characteristics of the material. The sharp-notch strength:yield strength ratio is also determined.
1.2 This test method is restricted to one specimen width which is generally suitable for evaluation of high-strength materials (yield strength-to-density ratio above 18 kgf/mm2)/(g/cm3) or (700000 psi/lbin.3 ). The test will discriminate differences in resistance to unstable fracture when the sharp-notch strength is less than the tensile yield strength. The discrimination increases as the ratio of the notch strength to the yield strength decreases.
1.3 This test method is restricted to sheet materials not less than 0.64 mm (0.025 in.) and not exceeding 6 mm (0.25 in.) in thickness. Since the notch strength may depend on the sheet thickness, comparison of various material conditions must be based on tests of specimens having the same nominal thickness.
1.4 The sharp-notch strength may depend strongly upon temperature within a certain range depending upon the characteristics of the material. The test method is suitable for tests at any appropriate temperature. However, comparisons of various material conditions must be based on tests conducted at the same temperature.
Note 1—Further information on background and need for this type of test is given in the first report by the ASTM Committee on Fracture Testing of High-Strength Sheet Materials.
Note 2—The values stated in SI (metric) units are to be regarded as the standard.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
This test method covers the determination of a comparative measure of the resistance of sheet materials to unstable fracture originating from a very sharp stress-concentrator or crack. It relates specifically to fracture under continuously increasing force and excludes conditions of applying force that produce creep or fatigue. The quantity determined is the sharp-notch strength of a specimen of particular dimensions, and this value depends upon these dimensions as well as the characteristics of the material. The sharp-notch strength:yield strength ratio is also determined.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee E08 on Fatigue and Fracture, this test method was withdrawn in October 2010 because the standard is substantially out of date with respect to current referenced standards as well as with current fracture mechanics understanding.

General Information

Status
Withdrawn
Publication Date
09-May-2003
Withdrawal Date
30-Sep-2010
ICS
77.040.10 - Mechanical testing of metals
Technical Committee
E08 - Fatigue and Fracture
Drafting Committee
E08.07 - Fracture Mechanics
Current Stage
Ref Project

Relations

Replaces
ASTM E338-91(1997) - Standard Test Method of Sharp-Notch Tension Testing of High-Strength Sheet Materials
Effective Date
10-May-2003
Referred By
ASTM E740/E740M-03(2016) - Standard Practice for Fracture Testing with Surface-Crack Tension Specimens
Effective Date
10-May-2003
Referred By
ASTM E1823-23 - Standard Terminology Relating to Fatigue and Fracture Testing
Effective Date
10-May-2003

Buy Standard

ASTM E338-03 - Standard Test Method of Sharp-Notch Tension Testing of High-Strength Sheet Materials (Withdrawn 2010)ASTM E338-03 - Standard Test Method of Sharp-Notch Tension Testing of High-Strength Sheet Materials (Withdrawn 2010)
PreviousNext
Standard
ASTM E338-03 - Standard Test Method of Sharp-Notch Tension Testing of High-Strength Sheet Materials (Withdrawn 2010)
English language
6 pages
sale 15% off
Preview
sale 15% off
Preview

Standards Content (Sample)

NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
Designation:E338–03
Standard Test Method of
Sharp-Notch Tension Testing of High-Strength Sheet
1
Materials
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E338; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision.Anumber in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval.A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
This standard has been approved for use by agencies of the Department of Defense.
2
Testing of High-Strength Sheet Materials.
1. Scope
NOTE 2—ThevaluesstatedinSI(metric)unitsaretoberegardedasthe
1.1 Thistestmethodcoversthedeterminationofacompara-
standard.
tive measure of the resistance of sheet materials to unstable
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the
fracture originating from a very sharp stress-concentrator or
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
crack. It relates specifically to fracture under continuously
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
increasing force and excludes conditions of applying force that
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
produce creep or fatigue. The quantity determined is the
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.
sharp-notch strength of a specimen of particular dimensions,
and this value depends upon these dimensions as well as the
2. Referenced Documents
characteristics of the material. The sharp-notch strength:yield
3
2.1 ASTM Standards:
strength ratio is also determined.
E4 Practices for Force Verification of Testing Machines
1.2 This test method is restricted to one specimen width
E8 Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials
which is generally suitable for evaluation of high-strength
2 E602 Test Method for Sharp-Notch Tension Testing with
materials (yield strength-to-density ratio above 18 kgf/mm )/
3 −3
Cylindrical Specimens
(g/cm ) or (700 000 psi/lb·in. ). The test will discriminate
E1823 Terminology Relating to Fatigue and Fracture Test-
differences in resistance to unstable fracture when the sharp-
ing
notch strength is less than the tensile yield strength. The
discriminationincreasesastheratioofthenotchstrengthtothe
3. Terminology
yield strength decreases.
3.1 Definitions:
1.3 This test method is restricted to sheet materials not less
−2
3.1.1 crack strength, s [FL ]—themaximumvalueofthe
c
than 0.64 mm (0.025 in.) and not exceeding 6 mm (0.25 in.) in
nominal (net-section) stress that a cracked specimen is capable
thickness. Since the notch strength may depend on the sheet
of sustaining.
thickness, comparison of various material conditions must be
3.1.1.1 Discussion—See definition of nominal (net-
based on tests of specimens having the same nominal thick-
section) stress in Terminology E1823.
ness.
3.1.1.2 Discussion—Crack strength is calculated on the
1.4 The sharp-notch strength may depend strongly upon
basis of the maximum force and the original minimum cross-
temperature within a certain range depending upon the char-
sectionalarea(netcrosssectionorligament).Thus,ittakesinto
acteristics of the material. The test method is suitable for tests
account the original size of the crack, but ignores any crack
at any appropriate temperature. However, comparisons of
extension that may occur during the test.
variousmaterialconditionsmustbebasedontestsconductedat
3.1.1.3 Discussion—Crack strength is analogous to the
the same temperature.
ultimate tensile strength, as it is based on the ratio of the
NOTE 1—Further information on background and need for this type of
maximum load to the minimum cross-sectional area of the
test is given in the first report by the ASTM Committee on Fracture
specimen at the start of the test.
1 2
This method is under the jurisdiction ofASTM Committee E08 on Fatigue and “Fracture Testing of High-Strength Sheet Materials,” ASTM Bulletin,ASTBA,
Fracture and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E08.07 on Fracture No. 243, 1960, pp. 29–40; ibid., No. 244, 1960, pp. 18–28.
3
Mechanics. For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
CurrenteditionapprovedMay10,2003.PublishedJuly2003.Originallyapprved contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
1967. Last previous edition approved in 1997 as E338–91(97). DOI: 10.1520/ Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
E0338-03. the ASTM website.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.
1

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
E338–03
−2
3.1.2 sharp-notchstrength, s [FL ]—themaximumnomi- 4.4 The precision of sharp-notch strength measurement
s
nal (net-section) stress that a sharply notched specimen is s
...

Questions, Comments and Discussion

Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.

This May Also Interest You

ASTM
ASTM E1820-23b(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fracture Toughness

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assuming the presence of a preexisting, sharp, fatigue crack, the material fracture toughness values identified by this test method characterize its resistance to: (1)  fracture of a stationary crack, (2) fracture after some stable tearing, (3) stable tearing onset, and (4) sustained stable tearing. This test method is particularly useful when the material response cannot be anticipated before the test. Application of procedures in Test Method E1921 is recommended for testing ferritic steels that undergo cleavage fracture in the ductile-to-brittle transition.  
5.1.1 These fracture toughness values may serve as a basis for material comparison, selection, and quality assurance. Fracture toughness can be used to rank materials within a similar yield strength range.  
5.1.2 These fracture toughness values may serve as a basis for structural flaw tolerance assessment. Awareness of differences that may exist between laboratory test and field conditions is required to make proper flaw tolerance assessment.  
5.2 The following cautionary statements are based on some observations.  
5.2.1 Particular care must be exercised in applying to structural flaw tolerance assessment the fracture toughness value associated with fracture after some stable tearing has occurred. This response is characteristic of ferritic steel in the transition regime. This response is especially sensitive to material inhomogeneity and to constraint variations that may be induced by planar geometry, thickness differences, mode of loading, and structural details.  
5.2.2 The J-R curve from bend-type specimens recommended by this test method (SE(B), C(T), and DC(T)) has been observed to be conservative with respect to results from tensile loading configurations.  
5.2.3 The values of δc, δu, Jc, and Ju  may be affected by specimen dimensions.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers procedures and guidelines for the determination of fracture toughness of metallic materials using the following parameters: K, J, and CTOD (δ). Toughness can be measured in the R-curve format or as a point value. The fracture toughness determined in accordance with this test method is for the opening mode (Mode I) of loading.
Note 1: Until this version, KIc could be evaluated using this test method as well as by using Test Method E399. To avoid duplication, the evaluation of KIc has been removed from this test method and the user is referred to Test Method E399.  
1.2 The recommended specimens are single-edge bend, [SE(B)], compact, [C(T)], and disk-shaped compact, [DC(T)]. All specimens contain notches that are sharpened with fatigue cracks.  
1.2.1 Specimen dimensional (size) requirements vary according to the fracture toughness analysis applied. The guidelines are established through consideration of material toughness, material flow strength, and the individual qualification requirements of the toughness value per values sought.  
Note 2: Other standard methods for the determination of fracture toughness using the parameters K, J, and CTOD are contained in Test Methods E399, E1290, and E1921. This test method was developed to provide a common method for determining all applicable toughness parameters from a single test.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations iss...

  • Standard
    67 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    67 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E647-23a(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fatigue Crack Growth Rates

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Fatigue crack growth rate expressed as a function of crack-tip stress-intensity factor range, da/dN versus ΔK, characterizes a material's resistance to stable crack extension under cyclic loading. Background information on the ration-ale for employing linear elastic fracture mechanics to analyze fatigue crack growth rate data is given in Refs (3) and (4).  
5.1.1 In innocuous (inert) environments fatigue crack growth rates are primarily a function of ΔK and force ratio, R, or Kmax and R (Note 1). Temperature and aggressive environments can significantly affect da/dN versus ΔK, and in many cases accentuate R-effects and introduce effects of other loading variables such as cycle frequency and waveform. Attention needs to be given to the proper selection and control of these variables in research studies and in the generation of design data.
Note 1: ΔK, Kmax, and R are not independent of each other. Specification of any two of these variables is sufficient to define the loading condition. It is customary to specify one of the stress-intensity parameters (ΔK or Kmax) along with the force ratio, R.  
5.1.2 Expressing da/dN as a function of ΔK provides results that are independent of planar geometry, thus enabling exchange and comparison of data obtained from a variety of specimen configurations and loading conditions. Moreover, this feature enables da/dN versus ΔK data to be utilized in the design and evaluation of engineering structures. The concept of similitude is assumed, which implies that cracks of differing lengths subjected to the same nominal ΔK will advance by equal increments of crack extension per cycle.  
5.1.3 Fatigue crack growth rate data are not always geometry-independent in the strict sense since thickness effects sometimes occur. However, data on the influence of thickness on fatigue crack growth rate are mixed. Fatigue crack growth rates over a wide range of ΔK have been reported to either increase, decrease, or remain unaffected as specimen...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method2 covers the determination of fatigue crack growth rates from near-threshold (see region I in Fig. 1) to Kmax  controlled instability (see region III in Fig. 1.) Results are expressed in terms of the crack-tip stress-intensity factor range (ΔK), defined by the theory of linear elasticity.  
1.9 Special requirements for the various specimen configurations appear in the following order:
The Compact Specimen  
Annex A1  
The Middle Tension Specimen  
Annex A2  
The Eccentrically-Loaded Single Edge Crack Tension Specimen  
Annex A3  
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.11 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

  • Standard
    52 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    52 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E399-23(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Linear-Elastic Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness of Metallic Materials

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The property KIc determined by this test method characterizes the resistance of a material to fracture in a neutral environment in the presence of a sharp crack under essentially linear-elastic stress and severe tensile constraint, such that (1) the state of stress near the crack front approaches tritensile plane strain, and (2) the crack-tip plastic zone is small compared to the crack size, specimen thickness, and ligament ahead of the crack.  
5.1.1 Variation in the value of KIc can be expected within the allowable range of specimen proportions, a/W and  W/B. KIc may also be expected to rise with increasing ligament size. Notwithstanding these variations, however, KIc is believed to represent a lower limiting value of fracture toughness (for 2 % apparent crack extension) in the environment and at the speed and temperature of the test.  
5.1.2 Lower and more highly variable values of fracture toughness can be obtained from specimens that fail by cleavage fracture; for example, specimens of ferritic steels tested at temperatures in the ductile-to-brittle transition region or below. Specimens failing by cleavage are also more likely to exhibit warm prestressing effects, where precracking at a temperature higher than the test temperature can artificially increase the fracture toughness measured (2). The present test method is not intended for cleavage fracture. Instead, the user is referred to Test Method E1921 and E1820 which are applicable to cleavage fracture and contain safeguards against warm prestressing. Likewise this test method should not be used when specimen failure is accompanied by appreciable plastic deformation even after the specimen size has been maximized within product dimensional constraints. Guidance on testing elastic-plastic materials is given in Test Method E1820.  
5.1.3 The value of KIc obtained by this test method may be used to estimate the relation between failure stress and crack size for a material in service wherein the condition...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers the determination of fracture toughness (KIc and optionally KIsi) of metallic materials under predominantly linear-elastic, plane-strain conditions using fatigue precracked specimens having a thickness of 1.6 mm (0.063 in.) or greater2 subjected to slowly, or in special (elective) cases rapidly, increasing crack-displacement force. Details of test apparatus, specimen configuration, and experimental procedure are given in the annexes. Two procedures are outlined for using the experimental data to calculate fracture toughness values:  
1.1.1 The KIc test procedure is described in the main body of this test standard and is a mandatory part of the testing and results reporting procedure for this test method. The KIc test procedure is based on crack growth of up to 2 % percent of the specimen width. This can lead to a specimen size dependent rising fracture toughness resistance curve, with larger specimens producing higher fracture toughness results.  
1.1.2 The KIsi test procedure is described in Appendix X1 and is an optional part of this test method. The KIsi test procedure is based on a fixed amount of crack extension of 0.5 mm, and as a result, KIsi is less sensitive to specimen size than KIc. This less size-sensitive fracture toughness, KIsi, is called size-insensitive throughout this test method. Appendix X1 contains an optional procedure for reinterpreting the force-displacement test record recorded as part of this test method to calculate the additional fracture toughness value, KIsi.
Note 1: Plane-strain fracture toughness tests of materials thinner than 1.6 mm (0.063 in.) that are sufficiently brittle (see 7.1) can be made using other types of specimens (1).3 There is no standard test method for such thin materials.  
1.2 This test method is divided into two parts. The first part gives general recommendations and requirements for testing and includes specific requirements for the KI...

  • Standard
    40 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    40 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E468/E468M-23(Practice)
Standard Practice for Presentation of Constant Amplitude Fatigue Test Results for Metallic Materials

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Fatigue test results may be significantly influenced by the properties and history of the parent material, the operations performed during the preparation of the fatigue specimens, and the testing machine and test procedures used during the generation of the data. The presentation of fatigue test results should include citation of basic information on the material, specimens, and testing to increase the utility of the results and to reduce to a minimum the possibility of misinterpretation or improper application of those results.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the desirable and minimum information to be communicated between the originator and the user of data derived from constant-force amplitude axial, bending, or torsion fatigue tests of metallic materials tested in air and at room temperature.  
Note 1: Practice E466, although not directly referenced in the text, is considered important enough to be listed in this standard.  
1.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

  • Standard
    7 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    7 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E561-23(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for KR Curve Determination

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The KR curve characterizes the resistance to fracture of materials during slow, stable crack extension and results from the growth of the plastic zone ahead of the crack as it extends from a fatigue precrack or sharp notch. It provides a record of the toughness development as a crack is driven stably under increasing applied stress intensity factor K. For a given material, KR curves are dependent upon specimen thickness, temperature, and strain rate. The amount of valid KR data generated in the test depends on the specimen type, size, method of loading, and, to a lesser extent, testing machine characteristics.  
5.2 For an untested geometry, the KR curve can be matched with the applied-K curves (crack driving curves) to estimate the degree of stable crack extension and the conditions necessary to cause unstable crack propagation (2). In making this estimate, KR curves are regarded as being independent of initial crack size ao and the specimen configuration in which they are developed. For a given material, material thickness, and test temperature, KR curves appear to be a function of only the effective crack extension Δae (3).  
5.2.1 To predict crack behavior and instability in a component, a family of applied-K curves is generated by calculating  K as a function of crack size for the component using a series of force, displacement, or combined loading conditions. The KR curve may be superimposed on the family of applied-K curves as shown in Fig. 1, with the origin of the KR curve coinciding with the assumed initial crack size ao. The intersection of the applied-K curves with the KR curve shows the expected effective stable crack extension for each loading condition. The applied-K curve that develops tangency with the KR curve defines the critical loading condition that will cause the onset of unstable fracture under the loading conditions used to develop the applied-K curves.
FIG. 1 Schematic Representation of KR curve and Applied K Curves to Predict Insta...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers the determination of the resistance to fracture of metallic materials under Mode I loading at static rates using either of the following notched and precracked specimens: the middle-cracked tension M(T) specimen or the compact tension C(T) specimen. A KR curve is a continuous record of toughness development (resistance to crack extension) in terms of KR plotted against crack extension in the specimen as a crack is driven under an increasing stress intensity factor, K. (1)2  
1.2 Materials that can be tested for KR curve development are not limited by strength, thickness, or toughness, so long as specimens are of sufficient size to remain predominantly elastic to the effective crack extension value of interest.  
1.3 Specimens of standard proportions are required, but size is variable, to be adjusted for yield strength and toughness of the materials.  
1.4 Only two of the many possible specimen types that could be used to develop KR curves are covered in this method.  
1.5 The test is applicable to conditions where a material exhibits slow, stable crack extension under increasing crack driving force, which may exist in relatively tough materials under plane stress crack tip conditions.  
1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Reco...

  • Standard
    18 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    18 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E1820-23a(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fracture Toughness

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assuming the presence of a preexisting, sharp, fatigue crack, the material fracture toughness values identified by this test method characterize its resistance to: (1)  fracture of a stationary crack, (2) fracture after some stable tearing, (3) stable tearing onset, and (4) sustained stable tearing. This test method is particularly useful when the material response cannot be anticipated before the test. Application of procedures in Test Method E1921 is recommended for testing ferritic steels that undergo cleavage fracture in the ductile-to-brittle transition.  
5.1.1 These fracture toughness values may serve as a basis for material comparison, selection, and quality assurance. Fracture toughness can be used to rank materials within a similar yield strength range.  
5.1.2 These fracture toughness values may serve as a basis for structural flaw tolerance assessment. Awareness of differences that may exist between laboratory test and field conditions is required to make proper flaw tolerance assessment.  
5.2 The following cautionary statements are based on some observations.  
5.2.1 Particular care must be exercised in applying to structural flaw tolerance assessment the fracture toughness value associated with fracture after some stable tearing has occurred. This response is characteristic of ferritic steel in the transition regime. This response is especially sensitive to material inhomogeneity and to constraint variations that may be induced by planar geometry, thickness differences, mode of loading, and structural details.  
5.2.2 The J-R curve from bend-type specimens recommended by this test method (SE(B), C(T), and DC(T)) has been observed to be conservative with respect to results from tensile loading configurations.  
5.2.3 The values of δc, δu, Jc, and Ju  may be affected by specimen dimensions.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers procedures and guidelines for the determination of fracture toughness of metallic materials using the following parameters: K, J, and CTOD (δ). Toughness can be measured in the R-curve format or as a point value. The fracture toughness determined in accordance with this test method is for the opening mode (Mode I) of loading.
Note 1: Until this version, KIc could be evaluated using this test method as well as by using Test Method E399. To avoid duplication, the evaluation of KIc has been removed from this test method and the user is referred to Test Method E399.  
1.2 The recommended specimens are single-edge bend, [SE(B)], compact, [C(T)], and disk-shaped compact, [DC(T)]. All specimens contain notches that are sharpened with fatigue cracks.  
1.2.1 Specimen dimensional (size) requirements vary according to the fracture toughness analysis applied. The guidelines are established through consideration of material toughness, material flow strength, and the individual qualification requirements of the toughness value per values sought.  
Note 2: Other standard methods for the determination of fracture toughness using the parameters K, J, and CTOD are contained in Test Methods E399, E1290, and E1921. This test method was developed to provide a common method for determining all applicable toughness parameters from a single test.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations iss...

  • Standard
    65 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    65 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E1820-23(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fracture Toughness

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assuming the presence of a preexisting, sharp, fatigue crack, the material fracture toughness values identified by this test method characterize its resistance to: (1)  fracture of a stationary crack, (2) fracture after some stable tearing, (3) stable tearing onset, and (4) sustained stable tearing. This test method is particularly useful when the material response cannot be anticipated before the test. Application of procedures in Test Method E1921 is recommended for testing ferritic steels that undergo cleavage fracture in the ductile-to-brittle transition.  
5.1.1 These fracture toughness values may serve as a basis for material comparison, selection, and quality assurance. Fracture toughness can be used to rank materials within a similar yield strength range.  
5.1.2 These fracture toughness values may serve as a basis for structural flaw tolerance assessment. Awareness of differences that may exist between laboratory test and field conditions is required to make proper flaw tolerance assessment.  
5.2 The following cautionary statements are based on some observations.  
5.2.1 Particular care must be exercised in applying to structural flaw tolerance assessment the fracture toughness value associated with fracture after some stable tearing has occurred. This response is characteristic of ferritic steel in the transition regime. This response is especially sensitive to material inhomogeneity and to constraint variations that may be induced by planar geometry, thickness differences, mode of loading, and structural details.  
5.2.2 The J-R curve from bend-type specimens recommended by this test method (SE(B), C(T), and DC(T)) has been observed to be conservative with respect to results from tensile loading configurations.  
5.2.3 The values of δc, δu, Jc, and Ju   may be affected by specimen dimensions.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers procedures and guidelines for the determination of fracture toughness of metallic materials using the following parameters: K, J, and CTOD (δ). Toughness can be measured in the R-curve format or as a point value. The fracture toughness determined in accordance with this test method is for the opening mode (Mode I) of loading.
Note 1: Until this version, KIc could be evaluated using this test method as well as by using Test Method E399. To avoid duplication, the evaluation of KIc has been removed from this test method and the user is referred to Test Method E399.  
1.2 The recommended specimens are single-edge bend, [SE(B)], compact, [C(T)], and disk-shaped compact, [DC(T)]. All specimens contain notches that are sharpened with fatigue cracks.  
1.2.1 Specimen dimensional (size) requirements vary according to the fracture toughness analysis applied. The guidelines are established through consideration of material toughness, material flow strength, and the individual qualification requirements of the toughness value per values sought.  
Note 2: Other standard methods for the determination of fracture toughness using the parameters K, J, and CTOD are contained in Test Methods E399, E1290, and E1921. This test method was developed to provide a common method for determining all applicable toughness parameters from a single test.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations is...

  • Standard
    65 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    65 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E647-23(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fatigue Crack Growth Rates

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Fatigue crack growth rate expressed as a function of crack-tip stress-intensity factor range, da/dN versus ΔK, characterizes a material's resistance to stable crack extension under cyclic loading. Background information on the ration-ale for employing linear elastic fracture mechanics to analyze fatigue crack growth rate data is given in Refs (1)4 and (2).  
5.1.1 In innocuous (inert) environments fatigue crack growth rates are primarily a function of ΔK and force ratio, R, or Kmax and R (Note 1). Temperature and aggressive environments can significantly affect da/dN versus ΔK, and in many cases accentuate R-effects and introduce effects of other loading variables such as cycle frequency and waveform. Attention needs to be given to the proper selection and control of these variables in research studies and in the generation of design data.
Note 1: ΔK, Kmax, and R are not independent of each other. Specification of any two of these variables is sufficient to define the loading condition. It is customary to specify one of the stress-intensity parameters (ΔK or Kmax) along with the force ratio, R.  
5.1.2 Expressing da/dN as a function of ΔK provides results that are independent of planar geometry, thus enabling exchange and comparison of data obtained from a variety of specimen configurations and loading conditions. Moreover, this feature enables da/dN versus ΔK data to be utilized in the design and evaluation of engineering structures. The concept of similitude is assumed, which implies that cracks of differing lengths subjected to the same nominal ΔK will advance by equal increments of crack extension per cycle.  
5.1.3 Fatigue crack growth rate data are not always geometry-independent in the strict sense since thickness effects sometimes occur. However, data on the influence of thickness on fatigue crack growth rate are mixed. Fatigue crack growth rates over a wide range of ΔK have been reported to either increase, decrease, or remain unaffected as specime...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method2 covers the determination of fatigue crack growth rates from near-threshold (see region I in Fig. 1) to Kmax  controlled instability (see region III in Fig. 1.) Results are expressed in terms of the crack-tip stress-intensity factor range (ΔK), defined by the theory of linear elasticity.  
1.9 Special requirements for the various specimen configurations appear in the following order:
The Compact Specimen  
Annex A1  
The Middle Tension Specimen  
Annex A2  
The Eccentrically-Loaded Single Edge Crack Tension Specimen  
Annex A3  
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.11 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

  • Standard
    52 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    52 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E1921-22a(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Determination of Reference Temperature, T0, for Ferritic Steels in the Transition Range

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Fracture toughness is expressed in terms of an elastic-plastic stress intensity factor, KJc, that is derived from the J-integral calculated at fracture.  
5.2 Ferritic steels are microscopically inhomogeneous with respect to the orientation of individual grains. Also, grain boundaries have properties distinct from those of the grains. Both contain carbides or nonmetallic inclusions that can act as nucleation sites for cleavage microcracks. The random location of such nucleation sites with respect to the position of the crack front manifests itself as variability of the associated fracture toughness (13). This results in a distribution of fracture toughness values that is amenable to characterization using the statistical methods in this test method.  
5.3 The statistical methods in this test method assume that the data set represents a macroscopically homogeneous material, such that the test material has both the uniform tensile and toughness properties. The fracture toughness evaluation of nonuniform materials is not amenable to the statistical analysis procedures employed in this test method. For example, multi-pass weldments can create heat-affected and brittle zones with localized properties that are quite different from either the bulk or weld materials. Thick-section steels also often exhibit some variation in properties near the surfaces. Metallographic analysis can be used to identify possible nonuniform regions in a material. These regions can then be evaluated through mechanical testing such as hardness, microhardness, and tensile testing for comparison with the bulk material. It is also advisable to measure the toughness properties of these nonuniform regions distinctly from the bulk material. Section 10.6 provides a screening criterion to assess whether the data set may not be representative of a macroscopically homogeneous material, and therefore, may not be amenable to the statistical analysis procedures employed in this test method. If the data ...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers the determination of a reference temperature, T0, which characterizes the fracture toughness of ferritic steels that experience onset of cleavage cracking at elastic, or elastic-plastic KJc instabilities, or both. The specific types of ferritic steels (3.2.2) covered are those with yield strengths ranging from 275 to 825 MPa (40 to 120 ksi) and weld metals, after stress-relief annealing, that have 10 % or less strength mismatch relative to that of the base metal.  
1.2 The specimens covered are fatigue precracked single-edge notched bend bars, SE(B), and standard or disk-shaped compact tension specimens, C(T) or DC(T). A range of specimen sizes with proportional dimensions is recommended. The dimension on which the proportionality is based is specimen thickness.  
1.3 Median KJc values tend to vary with the specimen type at a given test temperature, presumably due to constraint differences among the allowable test specimens in 1.2. The degree of KJc variability among specimen types is analytically predicted to be a function of the material flow properties (1)2 and decreases with increasing strain hardening capacity for a given yield strength material. This KJc dependency ultimately leads to discrepancies in calculated T0 values as a function of specimen type for the same material. T0 values obtained from C(T) specimens are expected to be higher than T0 values obtained from SE(B) specimens. Best estimate comparisons of several materials indicate that the average difference between C(T) and SE(B)-derived T0 values is approximately 10°C (2). C(T) and SE(B) T0 differences up to 15 °C have also been recorded (3). However, comparisons of individual, small datasets may not necessarily reveal this average trend. Datasets which contain both C(T) and SE(B) specimens may generate T0 results which fall between the T0 values calculated using solely C(T) or SE(B) specimens. It is therefore strongly recomm...

  • Standard
    40 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    40 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E647-22b(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fatigue Crack Growth Rates

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Fatigue crack growth rate expressed as a function of crack-tip stress-intensity factor range, d a/dN versus ΔK, characterizes a material's resistance to stable crack extension under cyclic loading. Background information on the ration-ale for employing linear elastic fracture mechanics to analyze fatigue crack growth rate data is given in Refs (1)5 and (2).  
5.1.1 In innocuous (inert) environments fatigue crack growth rates are primarily a function of ΔK and force ratio, R, or Kmax and R (Note 1). Temperature and aggressive environments can significantly affect da/ dN versus ΔK, and in many cases accentuate R-effects and introduce effects of other loading variables such as cycle frequency and waveform. Attention needs to be given to the proper selection and control of these variables in research studies and in the generation of design data.
Note 1: ΔK, Kmax, and R are not independent of each other. Specification of any two of these variables is sufficient to define the loading condition. It is customary to specify one of the stress-intensity parameters (ΔK or Kmax) along with the force ratio, R.  
5.1.2 Expressing da/dN as a function of ΔK provides results that are independent of planar geometry, thus enabling exchange and comparison of data obtained from a variety of specimen configurations and loading conditions. Moreover, this feature enables d a/dN versus ΔK data to be utilized in the design and evaluation of engineering structures. The concept of similitude is assumed, which implies that cracks of differing lengths subjected to the same nominal ΔK will advance by equal increments of crack extension per cycle.  
5.1.3 Fatigue crack growth rate data are not always geometry-independent in the strict sense since thickness effects sometimes occur. However, data on the influence of thickness on fatigue crack growth rate are mixed. Fatigue crack growth rates over a wide range of ΔK have been reported to either increase, decrease, or remain unaffected as spec...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method2 covers the determination of fatigue crack growth rates from near-threshold (see region I in Fig. 1) to Kmax  controlled instability (see region III in Fig. 1.) Results are expressed in terms of the crack-tip stress-intensity factor range (ΔK), defined by the theory of linear elasticity.  
1.9 Special requirements for the various specimen configurations appear in the following order:
The Compact Specimen  
Annex A1  
The Middle Tension Specimen  
Annex A2  
The Eccentrically-Loaded Single Edge Crack Tension Specimen  
Annex A3  
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.11 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

  • Standard
    52 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    52 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off