Size effects and energy disposition in impact-specimen testing of ASTM A 533 grade B steel
- 70 Downloads
A series of impact-type specimens, ranging in thickness from 0.1 to 12 in., have been tested. The effects of size on the impact energy per unit volume of the plastically deformed material of the specimens tested are investigated using the laws of similitude. Complementary to this, a model illustrating the disposition of energy between shear lip and flat fracture is proposed and satisfactorily verified by the test results. It is shown that significant size effects on impact energy exist at all temperatures and, in particular, a size effect of around five exists even at upper-shelf temperature for 12-in.-thick impact specimens when compared to the energy from thinner specimens, say a Charpy impact specimen. This is to say that, on the upper shelf, the impact energy of a 12-in.-thick specimen is equivalent to between 25 and 30 ft-lb Charpy impact energy. To lend further support to the behavior thus defined, it is shown that the nil-ductility type behavior in 12-in. thicknesses is exhibited at around 145° F as compared to the similar behavior exhibited by regular drop-weight specimens at around 0° F. That is, the nil-ductility temperature, if redefined as a type of behavior and not confined to a given size specimen for 12-in.-thick plate, is about 145° F.
KeywordsMechanical Engineer Fluid Dynamics Unit Volume Impact Energy Type Behavior
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Witt, F. J., Merkle, J. G. and Kooistra, L. F., “Fracture Behavior Investigations Under the USAEC-Sponsored Heavy Section Steel Technology Program,” Proc. First Internatl. Conf. on Pressure Vessel Tech., Part II, Materials and Fabrication, ASME, 709–722 (1969).Google Scholar
- 2.Loss, F. J. and Pellini, W. S., “Coupling of Fracture Mechanics and Transition Temperature Approaches to Fracture-Safe Design,” U. S. Naval Research Lab., NRL Report No. 6913 (April 14, 1969).Google Scholar
- 3.Pellini, W. S. and Loss, F. J., “Integration of Metallurgical and Fracture Mechanics Concepts of Transition Temperature Factors Relating to Fracture-Safe Design of Structural Steels,” U.S. Naval Research Lab., NRL Report No. 6900 (April 27, 1969).Google Scholar
- 4.Loss, F. J., “Dynamic Tear Test Investigations of the Fracture Toughness of Thick-Section Steel,” U. S. Naval Research Lab., NRL Report No. 7056 (May 14, 1970).Google Scholar
- 5.Shabbits, W. O., Pryle, W. H. and Wessel, E. T., “Heavy Section Fracture Toughness Properties of A 533, Grade B, Class 1 Steel Plate and Submerged Arc Weldment,” Westinghouse Electric Corp., Report No. WCAP-7414 (Dec. 1969).Google Scholar
- 6.Loechel, L. W., “The Effect of Testing Variables on the Transition Temperatures in Steel,” Martin Marietta Corp., Report No. MCR-69-189 (Nov. 20, 1969).Google Scholar
- 7.Durelli, A. J., Phillips, E. A. andTsao, C. H., Introduction to the Theoretical and Experimental Analysis of Stress and Strain, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, 278–302 (1958).Google Scholar
- 8.Brown, W. F., Jr. and Srawley, J. E., “Plane Strain Crack Toughness Testing of High Strength Metallic Materials,” ASTM Special Technical Publication No. 410, American Society for Testing and Materials (1966).Google Scholar
- 9.Bluhm, J. I., “A Model for the Effect of Thickness on Fracture Toughness,”Proceedings of the ASTM,6,1324–1331 (1961).Google Scholar
- 10.Merkle, J. G., “Preliminary Analysis of Fracture Toughness Data, Heavy Section Steel Technology Program Semiann. Progr. Rept. for Period Ending February 28. 1969,” USAEC Report ORNL-4463, Oak Ridge Natl. Lab., 137–153 (Jan. 1970).Google Scholar