ASTM E467-08
(Practice)Standard Practice for Verification of Constant Amplitude Dynamic Forces in an Axial Fatigue Testing System
Standard Practice for Verification of Constant Amplitude Dynamic Forces in an Axial Fatigue Testing System
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
It is well understood how to measure the forces applied to a specimen under static conditions. Practices E 4 details the required process for verifying the static force measurement capabilities of testing machines. During dynamic operation however, additional errors may manifest themselves in a testing machine. Further verification is necessary to confirm the dynamic force measurement capabilities of testing machines.
Note 1—The static machine verification accomplished by Practices E 4 simply establishes the reference. Indicated forces measured from the force cell are compared with the dynamometer conditioned forces statically for confirmation and then dynamically for dynamic verification of the fatigue testing system's force output.
Note 2—The dynamic accuracy of the force cell's output will not always meet the accuracy requirement of this standard without correction. Dynamic correction to the force cell output can be applied provided that verification is performed after the correction has been applied.
Note 3—Overall test accuracy is a combination of measurement accuracy and control accuracy. This practice provides methods to evaluate either or both. As control accuracy is dependent on many more variables than measurement accuracy it is imperative that the test operator utilize appropriate measurement tools to confirm that the testing machine’s control behavior is consistent between verification activities and actual testing activities.
Dynamic errors are primarily span dependent, not level dependent. That is, the error for a particular force endlevel during dynamic operation is dependent on the immediately preceding force endlevel. Larger spans imply larger absolute errors for the same force endlevel.
Due to the many test machine factors that influence dynamic force accuracy, verification is recommended for every new combination of potential error producing factors. Primary factors are specimen design, machine configuration, test frequency, and loadi...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for the dynamic verification of cyclic force amplitude control or measurement accuracy during constant amplitude testing in an axial fatigue testing system. It is based on the premise that force verification can be done with the use of a strain gaged elastic element. Use of this practice gives assurance that the accuracies of forces applied by the machine or dynamic force readings from the test machine, at the time of the test, after any user applied correction factors, fall within the limits recommended in Section 9. It does not address static accuracy which must first be addressed using Practices E 4 or equivalent.
1.2 Verification is specific to a particular test machine configuration and specimen. This standard is recommended to be used for each configuration of testing machine and specimen. Where dynamic correction factors are to be applied to test machine force readings in order to meet the accuracy recommended in Section 9, the verification is also specific to the correction process used. Finally, if the correction process is triggered or performed by a person, or both, then the verification is specific to that individual as well.
1.3 It is recognized that performance of a full verification for each configuration of testing machine and specimen configuration could be prohibitively time consuming and/or expensive. Annex A1 provides methods for estimating the dynamic accuracy impact of test machine and specimen configuration changes that may occur between full verifications. Where test machine dynamic accuracy is influenced by a person, estimating the dynamic accuracy impact of all individuals involved in the correction process is recommended. This practice does not specify how that assessment will be done due to the strong dependence on owner/operators of the test machine.
1.4 This practice is intended to be used periodically. Consistent results between verifications is exp...
General Information
Relations
Buy Standard
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: E467 – 08
Standard Practice for
Verification of Constant Amplitude Dynamic Forces in an
1
Axial Fatigue Testing System
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E467; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope machine configuration implies uncertain accuracy for dynamic
tests performed during that time period.
1.1 This practice covers procedures for the dynamic verifi-
1.5 This practice addresses the accuracy of the testing
cation of cyclic force amplitude control or measurement
machine’s force control or indicated forces, or both, as
accuracy during constant amplitude testing in an axial fatigue
compared to a dynamometer’s indicated dynamic forces. Force
testing system. It is based on the premise that force verification
control verification is only applicable for test systems that have
can be done with the use of a strain gaged elastic element. Use
some form of indicated force peak/valley monitoring or am-
of this practice gives assurance that the accuracies of forces
plitude control. For the purposes of this verification, the
appliedbythemachineordynamicforcereadingsfromthetest
dynamometer’s indicated dynamic forces will be considered
machine, at the time of the test, after any user applied
the true forces. Phase lag between dynamometer and force
correction factors, fall within the limits recommended in
transducer indicated forces is not within the scope of this
Section 9. It does not address static accuracy which must first
practice.
be addressed using Practices E4 or equivalent.
1.6 The results of either theAnnexA1 calculation or the full
1.2 Verification is specific to a particular test machine
experimental verification must be reported per Section 10 of
configuration and specimen. This standard is recommended to
this standard.
be used for each configuration of testing machine and speci-
1.7 This practice provides no assurance that the shape of the
men.Wheredynamiccorrectionfactorsaretobeappliedtotest
actual waveform conforms to the intended waveform within
machine force readings in order to meet the accuracy recom-
any specified tolerance.
mended in Section 9, the verification is also specific to the
1.8 Thisstandardisprincipallyfocusedatroomtemperature
correction process used. Finally, if the correction process is
operation. It is believed there are additional issues that must be
triggered or performed by a person, or both, then the verifica-
addressed when testing at high temperatures. At the present
tion is specific to that individual as well.
time, this standard practice must be viewed as only a partial
1.3 It is recognized that performance of a full verification
solution for high temperature testing.
for each configuration of testing machine and specimen con-
1.9 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded
figuration could be prohibitively time consuming and/or ex-
as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this
pensive. Annex A1 provides methods for estimating the dy-
standard.
namic accuracy impact of test machine and specimen
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the
configuration changes that may occur between full verifica-
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
tions. Where test machine dynamic accuracy is influenced by a
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
person, estimating the dynamic accuracy impact of all indi-
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
viduals involved in the correction process is recommended.
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.
This practice does not specify how that assessment will be
done due to the strong dependence on owner/operators of the
2. Referenced Documents
test machine.
2
2.1 ASTM Standards:
1.4 This practice is intended to be used periodically. Con-
E4 Practices for Force Verification of Testing Machines
sistent results between verifications is expected. Failure to
E6 TerminologyRelatingtoMethodsofMechanicalTesting
obtain consistent results between verifications using the same
E1823 Terminology Relating to Fatigue and Fracture Test-
ing
1
This practice is under the jurisdiction ofASTM Committee E08 on Fatigue and
Fracture and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E08.03 on Advanced
2
Apparatus and Techniques. For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
Current edition approved Nov. 1, 2008. Published January 2009. Originally contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
approved in 1972. Last previous edition approved in 2004 as E467 – 98a (2004). St
...
This document is not anASTM standard and is intended only to provide the user of anASTM standard an indication of what changes have been made to the previous version. Because
it may not be technically possible to adequately depict all changes accurately, ASTM recommends that users consult prior editions as appropriate. In all cases only the current version
of the standard as published by ASTM is to be considered the official document.
Designation:E467–98a (Reapproved 2004) Designation: E 467 – 08
Standard Practice for
Verification of Constant Amplitude Dynamic Forces in an
1
Axial Fatigue Testing System
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E 467; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope
1.1 This practice covers procedures for the dynamic verification of cyclic force amplitude control or measurement accuracy
during constant amplitude testing in an axial fatigue testing system. It is based on the premise that force verification can be done
with the use of a strain gaged elastic element. Use of this practice gives assurance that the accuracies of forces applied by the
machine or dynamic force readings from the test machine, at the time of the test, after any user applied correction factors, fall
within the limits recommended in Section 9. It does not address static accuracy which must first be addressed using Practices E 4
or equivalent.
1.2 Verification is specific to a particular test machine configuration and specimen. This standard is recommended to be used
for each configuration of testing machine and specimen. Where dynamic correction factors are to be applied to test machine force
readings in order to meet the accuracy recommended in Section 9, the verification is also specific to the correction process used.
Finally, if the correction process is triggered and/oror performed by a person, or both, then the verification is specific to that
individual as well.
1.3 It is recognized that performance of a full verification for each configuration of testing machine and specimen configuration
could be prohibitively time consuming and/or expensive.AnnexA1 provides methods for estimating the dynamic accuracy impact
of test machine and specimen configuration changes that may occur between full verifications. Where test machine dynamic
accuracy is influenced by a person, estimating the dynamic accuracy impact of all individuals involved in the correction process
isrecommended.Thispracticedoesnotspecifyhowthatassessmentwillbedoneduetothestrongdependenceonowner/operators
of the test machine.
1.4 This practice is intended to be used periodically. Consistent results between verifications is expected. Failure to obtain
consistent results between verifications using the same machine configuration implies uncertain accuracy for dynamic tests
performed during that time period.
1.5This practice addresses the accuracy of the testing machine’s indicated forces as compared to a dynamometer’s indicated
dynamic forces. For the purposes of this verification, the dynamometer’s indicated dynamic forces will be considered the true
forces. Phase lag between dynamometer and force transducer indicated forces is not within the scope of this practice.
1.5 This practice addresses the accuracy of the testing machine’s force control or indicated forces, or both, as compared to a
dynamometer’s indicated dynamic forces. Force control verification is only applicable for test systems that have some form of
indicated force peak/valley monitoring or amplitude control. For the purposes of this verification, the dynamometer’s indicated
dynamic forces will be considered the true forces. Phase lag between dynamometer and force transducer indicated forces is not
within the scope of this practice.
1.6 The results of either theAnnexA1 calculation or the full experimental verification must be reported per Section 10 of this
standard.
1.7This standard does not address the issue of a test machine’s control accuracy. It does not provide assurance that the force
obtained equals the force commanded within the specified accuracy. The correlation being verified is between the test machine’s
indicated force and the true force on the test specimen as measured by a dynamometer.
1.8This practice provides no assurance that the shape of the actual waveform conforms to the intended waveform within any
specified tolerance.
1.9This standard is principally focused at room temperature operation. It is believed there are additional issues that must be
addressed when testing at high temperatures.At the present time, this standard practice must be viewed as only a partial solution
for high temperature testing.
1
This practice is under the jurisdiction ofASTM Committee E08 on Fatigue and Fracture and is the direct responsi
...
This document is not anASTM standard and is intended only to provide the user of anASTM standard an indication of what changes have been made to the previous version. Because
it may not be technically possible to adequately depict all changes accurately, ASTM recommends that users consult prior editions as appropriate. In all cases only the current version
of the standard as published by ASTM is to be considered the official document.
Designation:E467–98a (Reapproved 2004) Designation: E 467 – 08
Standard Practice for
Verification of Constant Amplitude Dynamic Forces in an
1
Axial Fatigue Testing System
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E 467; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope
1.1 This practice covers procedures for the dynamic verification of cyclic force amplitude control or measurement accuracy
during constant amplitude testing in an axial fatigue testing system. It is based on the premise that force verification can be done
with the use of a strain gaged elastic element. Use of this practice gives assurance that the accuracies of forces applied by the
machine or dynamic force readings from the test machine, at the time of the test, after any user applied correction factors, fall
within the limits recommended in Section 9. It does not address static accuracy which must first be addressed using Practices E 4
or equivalent.
1.2 Verification is specific to a particular test machine configuration and specimen. This standard is recommended to be used
for each configuration of testing machine and specimen. Where dynamic correction factors are to be applied to test machine force
readings in order to meet the accuracy recommended in Section 9, the verification is also specific to the correction process used.
Finally, if the correction process is triggered and/oror performed by a person, or both, then the verification is specific to that
individual as well.
1.3 It is recognized that performance of a full verification for each configuration of testing machine and specimen configuration
could be prohibitively time consuming and/or expensive.AnnexA1 provides methods for estimating the dynamic accuracy impact
of test machine and specimen configuration changes that may occur between full verifications. Where test machine dynamic
accuracy is influenced by a person, estimating the dynamic accuracy impact of all individuals involved in the correction process
isrecommended.Thispracticedoesnotspecifyhowthatassessmentwillbedoneduetothestrongdependenceonowner/operators
of the test machine.
1.4 This practice is intended to be used periodically. Consistent results between verifications is expected. Failure to obtain
consistent results between verifications using the same machine configuration implies uncertain accuracy for dynamic tests
performed during that time period.
1.5This practice addresses the accuracy of the testing machine’s indicated forces as compared to a dynamometer’s indicated
dynamic forces. For the purposes of this verification, the dynamometer’s indicated dynamic forces will be considered the true
forces. Phase lag between dynamometer and force transducer indicated forces is not within the scope of this practice.
1.5 This practice addresses the accuracy of the testing machine’s force control or indicated forces, or both, as compared to a
dynamometer’s indicated dynamic forces. Force control verification is only applicable for test systems that have some form of
indicated force peak/valley monitoring or amplitude control. For the purposes of this verification, the dynamometer’s indicated
dynamic forces will be considered the true forces. Phase lag between dynamometer and force transducer indicated forces is not
within the scope of this practice.
1.6 The results of either theAnnexA1 calculation or the full experimental verification must be reported per Section 10 of this
standard.
1.7This standard does not address the issue of a test machine’s control accuracy. It does not provide assurance that the force
obtained equals the force commanded within the specified accuracy. The correlation being verified is between the test machine’s
indicated force and the true force on the test specimen as measured by a dynamometer.
1.8This practice provides no assurance that the shape of the actual waveform conforms to the intended waveform within any
specified tolerance.
1.9This standard is principally focused at room temperature operation. It is believed there are additional issues that must be
addressed when testing at high temperatures.At the present time, this standard practice must be viewed as only a partial solution
for high temperature testing.
1
This practice is under the jurisdiction ofASTM Committee E08 on Fatigue and Fracture and is the direct responsi
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.