Advertisement

International Journal of Fracture

, Volume 159, Issue 1, pp 1–20 | Cite as

Effects of weld strength mismatch on J and CTOD estimation procedure for SE(B) specimens

  • Gustavo H. B. Donato
  • Rodrigo Magnabosco
  • Claudio Ruggieri
Original Paper

Abstract

This work examines the effect of weld strength mismatch on fracture toughness measurements defined by J and CTOD fracture parameters using single edge notch bend (SE(B)) specimens. A central objective of the present study is to enlarge on previous developments of J and CTOD estimation procedures for welded bend specimens based upon plastic eta factors (η) and plastic rotational factors (r p ). Very detailed non-linear finite element analyses for plane-strain models of standard SE(B) fracture specimens with a notch located at the center of square groove welds and in the heat affected zone provide the evolution of load with increased crack mouth opening displacement required for the estimation procedure. One key result emerging from the analyses is that levels of weld strength mismatch within the range ±20% mismatch do not affect significantly J and CTOD estimation expressions applicable to homogeneous materials, particularly for deeply cracked fracture specimens with relatively large weld grooves. The present study provides additional understanding on the effect of weld strength mismatch on J and CTOD toughness measurements while, at the same time, adding a fairly extensive body of results to determine parameters J and CTOD for different materials using bend specimens with varying geometries and mismatch levels.

Keywords

Weld mismatch J-Integral CTOD Eta-method Rotational factor 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Petroleum Institute (1999) Welding of pipelines and related facilities, API 1104Google Scholar
  2. American Petroleum Institute (1999) Welding of pipelines and related facilities, API-1104, 19th ednGoogle Scholar
  3. American Petroleum Institute (2007) Fitness-for-service, API RP-579-1 / ASME FFS-1Google Scholar
  4. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (2004) Boiler and pressure vessel code. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. American Society for Testing and Materials (2008) Standard test method for crack-tip opening displacement (CTOD) fracture toughness measurement, ASTM E1290Google Scholar
  6. American Society for Testing and Materials (2008) Standard test method for measurement of fracture toughness, ASTM E1820Google Scholar
  7. American Welding Society (1987) Welding handbook: welding technology, 8th edn. vol 1. American Welding Society, MiamiGoogle Scholar
  8. Anderson TL (2005) Fracture mechanics: fundaments and applications, 3rd edn. CRC Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. British Energy (2003) Assessment of the integrity of structures containing defects, R6 Revision 4Google Scholar
  10. British Standard (1991) Fracture mechanics toughness tests, BS 7448Google Scholar
  11. British Standard Institution (2005) Guide on methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures, BS7910Google Scholar
  12. Chakrabarty J (2006) Theory of Plasticity, 3 edn. Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Chiodo MSG, Ruggieri C (2009) Failure assessments of corroded pipelines with axial defects using stress-based criteria: numerical studies and verification analyses. Int J Press Vessel Pip 86: 164–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Det Norske Veritas (2003) Submarine pipeline systems, Offshore Standard OS-F101Google Scholar
  15. Det Norsk Veritas (2004) Corroded pipelines, DNV-RP-F101Google Scholar
  16. Eripret C, Hornet P (1997) Fracture toughness testing procedures for strength mis-matched structures. In: Schwalbe KH, Koçak M (eds) Mis-matching of interfaces and welds. GKSS, GeestchachtGoogle Scholar
  17. Glover AG, Hauser D, Metzbower EA (1986) Failures of weldments. In: Metals handbook—vol 11: failure analysis and prevention. American Society for Metals, pp. 411–449Google Scholar
  18. Gullerud A, Koppenhoefer K, Roy A, RoyChowdhury S, Walters, M, Bichon B, Cochran K, Dodds R (2004) WARP3D: dynamic nonlinear fracture analysis of solids using a parallel computers and workstations. Structural Research Series (SRS) 607. UILU-ENG-95-2012. University of Illinois at Urbana–ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  19. Hornet P, Eripret C, Hao S (1997) Experimental J estimation from a load-CMOD curve for mis-matched SENB and CCT specimens. In: Schwalbe KH, Koçak M (eds) Mis-matching of interfaces and welds. GKSS, GeestchachtGoogle Scholar
  20. Hutchinson JW (1983) Fundamentals of the phenomenological theory of nonlinear fracture mechanics. J Appl Mech 50: 1042–1051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jutla T (1996) Fatigue and fracture control of weldments. In: ASM handbook—vol 19: fatigue and fracture. ASM International, pp 434–449Google Scholar
  22. Kenney KL, Reuter WG, Reemsnynder HS, Matlock DK (1997) Fracture initiation by local brittle zones in weldments of quenched and tempered structural alloy steel plate. In: Underwood JH, Macdonald BD, Mitchell MR (eds) Fatigue and fracture mechanics: 28th Volume, ASTM STP 1321. American Society for Testing and Materials, pp 427–449Google Scholar
  23. Kerr WH (1976) A review of factors affecting toughnness in welded steels. Int J Press Vessel Pip 4: 119–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kim YJ, Budden PJ (2001) Plastic η factors of homogeneous and bi-material SE(T) specimens for toughness and creep crack growth testing. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 24: 751–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kim YJ, Kim JS, Schwalbe KH (2003) Numerical investigation on J-integral testing of heterogeneous fracture toughness testing specimens—part I: weld metal cracks. Fatigue Frac Eng Mater Struct 26: 683–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kim YJ, Schwalbe KH (2001) Mismatch effect on plastic yield loads in idealized weldments—I: weld centre cracks. Eng Fract Mech 68: 163–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kim YJ, Schwalbe KH (2001) Mismatch effect on plastic yield loads in idealized weldments—I: heat affected zone cracks. Eng Fract Mech 68: 183–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kim YJ, Schwalbe KH (2001) Compendium of yield load solutions for strength mismatched SE(T), SE(B) and C(T) specimens. Eng Fract Mech 68: 1137–1151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kim YJ, Schwalbe KH, Ainsworth RA (2001) Simplified J-estimations based on the engineering treatment model for homogeneous and mismatched structures. Eng Fract Mech 68: 9–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kirk MT, Dodds RH (1992) Effect of weld strength mismatch on elastic-plastic fracture parameters. Structural Research Series (SRS) 570. UILU-ENG-92-2008. University of Illinois at Urbana–ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee H (2002) Estimation of crack driving forces on strength-mismatched bimaterial interfaces. Nucl Eng Des 212: 155–164CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  32. Moran B, Shih CF (1987) A general treatment of crack tip contour integrals. Int J Fract 35: 295–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nevalainen M, Dodds RH (1995) Numerical investigation of 3-D constraint effects on brittle fracture in SE(B) and C(T) specimens. Int J Fract 74: 131–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Parks DM (1992) Advances in characterization of elastic-plastic crack-tip fields. In: Argon AS (ed) Topics in fracture and fatigue. Springer-Verlag, New York pp 59–98. ISBN 0-387-97833-X/ISBN 3-540-97833-XGoogle Scholar
  35. Rice JR, Paris PC, Merkle JG (1973) Some further results of J-integral analysis and estimates. Progress in Flaws Growth and Fracture Toughness Testing, ASTM STP 536, American Society for Testing and Materials, pp 231–245Google Scholar
  36. Roos E, Eisele U, Silcher H (1986) A procedure for the experimental assessment of the J-integral by means of specimens of different geometries. Int J Press Vessel Pip 23: 81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sharobeam M, Landes JD (1991) The load separation criterion and methodology in ductile fracture mechanics. Int J Fract 41: 81–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shih CF, Asaro RJ (1988) Elastic-plastic analysis of cracks on bimaterial interfaces—part I: small scale yielding. J Appl Mech 55: 299–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shih CF, Asaro RJ (1989) Elastic-plastic analysis of cracks on bimaterial interfaces—part II: structure of small scale yielding fields. J Appl Mech 56: 763–779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shih CF, Asaro RJ, O’Dowd NP (1991) Elastic-plastic analysis of cracks on bimaterial interfaces—part III: large scale yielding. J Appl Mech 58: 450–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. SINTAP (1999) Structural integrity assessment procedure for European industry. Final Revision. EU-Project BE 95-1462Google Scholar
  42. Sumpter JDG, Turner CE (1976) Method for laboratory determination of Jc. Cracks and Fracture, ASTM STP 601, American Society for Testing and Materials, pp 3–18Google Scholar
  43. Toyoda M (1988) Fracture toughness evaluation of steel welds—part I. Technical Report Faculty of Engineering, Osaka UniversityGoogle Scholar
  44. Toyoda M (1989) Fracture toughness evaluation of steel welds—part II. Technical Report, Faculty of Engineering, Osaka UniversityGoogle Scholar
  45. Wang YY, Gordon JR (1992) The limits of applicability of J and CTOD estimation procedures for shallow cracked SENB specimens. In: Dawes MG (ed) International conference on shallow crack fracture mechanics, toughness tests and applications. CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang YY, Kirk MT, Gordon JR, Hornet P, Eripret C (1997) Recommended practice for fracture toughness testing of weldments with strength mismatch. In: Schwalbe KH, Koçak M (eds) Mis-matching of interfaces and welds. GKSS, GeestchachtGoogle Scholar
  47. Zerbst U, Ainsworth RA, Schwalbe K-H (2000) Basic principles of analytical flaw assessment methods. Int J Press Vessel Pip 77: 855–867CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gustavo H. B. Donato
    • 1
  • Rodrigo Magnabosco
    • 2
  • Claudio Ruggieri
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, (PNV-EPUSP)University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringIgnatian Educational Foundation (FEI)São Bernardo do CampoBrazil

Personalised recommendations