0
Research Papers: Materials and Fabrication

Application of Equivalent CTOD Ratio to Fracture Assessment of Structural Components

[+] Author and Article Information
Satoshi Igi

Steel Research Laboratory, JFE Steel Corporation, 1 Kawasaki-cho, Chuo-ku, Chiba 260-0835, Japans-igi@jfe-steel.co.jp

Mitsuru Ohata

Department of Materials and Manufacturing, Osaka University, 2-1 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japanohata@mapse.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp

Fumiyoshi Minami

Department of Materials and Manufacturing, Osaka University, 2-1 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japanminami@mapse.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 132(4), 041402 (Jul 23, 2010) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4001197 History: Received November 25, 2008; Revised January 02, 2010; Published July 23, 2010; Online July 23, 2010

Plastic constraint correction using the equivalent CTOD concept has been studied in the International Standardization of Fracture Toughness Evaluation Procedure for Fracture Assessment of Steel Structures project. This project was carried out over a 3-year period with the foundation of the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry, and the results were summarized in a draft standard “Method of constraint loss correction of CTOD fracture toughness for fracture assessment of steel component.” Equivalent CTOD ratio β is proposed in terms of the constraint loss correction between the fracture performance of steel structures and fracture toughness tests using the Weibull stress as the driving force of the brittle fracture. This paper provides the application procedure of equivalent CTOD ratio to the fracture assessment of structural components. Equivalent CTOD ratio was taken in the failure assessment diagram, and discussed the applicability by comparison with large scale test results of structural component such as edge surface crack panel, center through-wall crack panel, and other geometries.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Failure assessment diagram

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

FAD using equivalent CTOD ratio β

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

CTCP and CSCP test specimens: (a) CTCP; (b) CSCP

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Fracture assessment of CTCP: (a) SM490YB, (b) SM400B, and (c) HW685

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Fracture assessment of CSCP

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Geometry of ESCP with geometrical discontinuity test specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Fracture assessment of ESCP with geometrical discontinuity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of critical CTODs measured and estimated with CTOD test results

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In