|
|||||
|
|
Comparison of CTOD standards: BS 7448-Part 1 and revised ASTM E1290 |
|
| Authors: | Tetsuya Tagawa Yoichi Kayamori |
| Affiliation: | a Nagoya University, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Nagoya 464-8603, Japan b Nippon Steel Corporation, Steel Research Laboratory, Futtsu 293-8511, Japan c Osaka University, Department of Manufacturing Science, Suita 565-0871, Japan d JFE Steel Corporation, Steel Research Laboratory, Chiba 260-0835, Japan e Sumitomo Metal Industry Ltd., Corporate Research and Development Laboratories, Amagasaki 660-0891, Japan f IHI Corporation, Research Laboratory, Yokohama 235-8501, Japan g Kobe Steel Ltd., Mechanical Engineering Research Laboratory, Kobe 651-2271, Japan h National Maritime Research Institute, Mitaka 181-0004, Japan i University of Tokyo, Department of Environmental and Ocean Engineering, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan j Sophia University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tokyo 102-8554, Japan |
| Abstract: | Crack tip opening displacement (CTOD) has been calculated using the plastic hinge model with an assumed rotational center since the British Standards Institution (BS) standardized BS5762 in 1979. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) accepted the plastic hinge model and standardized E1290 in 1989. However, ASTM revised E1290 in 2002, and has proposed a conversion from J to CTOD. CTOD-based fracture toughness evaluation has been widely used for the defect assessment of many welded structural components, and two different CTOD calculations could lead to confusion for Fitness-for-Service. In this study, the effects of CTOD testing methodologies on CTOD values were investigated according to round robin tests conducted by the Japan Welding Engineering Society (WES), and the concept of CTOD as a fracture parameter is discussed. |
| Keywords: | Toughness testing Test standards Crack tip opening displacement J-integral Brittle fracture |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ | |