Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 44, Issue 21, pp 5842–5851 | Cite as

A novel approach to the prediction of long-term creep fracture: with application to 18Cr–12Ni–Mo steel (plate and bar)

Article

Abstract

Designers of new power-generation plants are looking to make use of new and existing high-strength austenitic steels so that these plants can operate with much higher steam and therefore metal temperatures. However, this article shows that the recently developed Wilshire–Scharning methodology is incapable of producing accurate long-term life predictions of these materials from short-term data. This article puts forward a modification of this approach that should enable existing and newly developed austenitic stainless steels to be brought into safe operation more cost effectively and over a quicker time span. Estimation of this model showed that the activation energy for creep was dependent on whether the test stress was above or below the yield stress. Analysis of the results from tests lasting only up to 5,000 h accurately predict the creep lives for stress–temperature conditions causing failure in 100,000 h or more.

Keywords

Austenitic Stainless Steel Failure Time Minimum Creep Rate Versus Steel Baseline Function 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Bendrick W, Gabrel J (2005) In: Shibli IA et al (eds) Creep and fracture in high temperature components—design and life assessment issues. DEStech Publ. Inc, London, p 406Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kimura K (2005) In: Shibli IA et al (eds) Creep and fracture in high temperature components—design and life assessment issues. DEStech Publ. Inc, London, p 1009Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cipolla L, Gabrel J (2005) In: Super-high strength steels. Associazione Italia di metallurgia, Rome, CD ROMGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yagi K (2005) In: Shibli IA et al (eds) Creep and fracture in high temperature components—design and life assessment issues. DEStech Publ. Inc, London, p 31Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wilshire B, Battenbough AJ (2007) Mater Sci Eng A 443:156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wilshire B, Scharning PJ (2008) Mater Sci Technol 24:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wilshire B, Scharning PJ (2008) Int Mater Rev 53:91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wilshire B, Scharning PJ (2009) Mater Sci Technol 25:242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wilshire B, Scharning PJ, Hurst R (2009) Mater Sci Eng A 510–511:3Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Evans M (2009) J Eng Mater Technol 131:021011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Spindler MW, Andersson H (2007) In: Viswanathan R, Gandy D, Coleman K (eds) Advances in materials technology for fossil power plants, proceedings from the fifth international conference, Marco Island, FL, October 3–5, 2007, pp 702–717Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Trunin II, Golobova NG, Loginov EA (1971) In: Proceedings of the 4th international symposium on heat resistant metallic materials. Mala Fatra: CSSR, p 168Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    NIMS Creep Data Sheet No. 14B (1988)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    NIMS Creep Data Sheet No. 15B (1988)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    NIMS Creep Data Sheet No. 9B (1990)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rieth M (2007) J Nuclear Mater 367:915CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wilshire B, Willis M (2004) Metall Mater Trans A 35A:563CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gifkins RC (1976) Metall Trans 7A:1225Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ashby MF, Jones DRH (1996) Engineering materials 1: an introduction to their properties and applications, Chap. 19. Butterworth-Heinemann, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EngineeringSwansea UniversitySwanseaUK

Personalised recommendations