Research Papers: Materials and Fabrication

Alloy 617 Creep–Fatigue Damage Evaluation Using Specimens With Strain Redistribution

[+] Author and Article Information
Yanli Wang

Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
1 Bethel Valley Road,
PO Box 2008, MS-6083,
Oak Ridge, TN 37831
e-mail: wangy3@ornl.gov

T.-L. Sham

Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
1 Bethel Valley Road,
PO Box 2008, MS-6155,
Oak Ridge, TN 37831
e-mail: shamt@ornl.gov

Robert I. Jetter

RI Jetter Consulting,
1106 Wildcat Canyon Road,
Pebble Beach, CA 93953
e-mail: bjetter@sbcglobal.net

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received April 4, 2014; final manuscript received July 16, 2014; published online October 15, 2014. Assoc. Editor: David L. Rudland.

This manuscript has been coauthored by UT-Battelle, LLC, under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the U.S. Department of Energy. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a nonexclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 137(2), 021402 (Oct 15, 2014) (6 pages) Paper No: PVT-14-1057; doi: 10.1115/1.4028054 History: Received April 04, 2014; Revised July 16, 2014

The simplified model test (SMT) method is an alternate approach to determine the cyclic life at elevated temperature. It is based on the use of creep–fatigue hold time test data from test specimens with elastic follow-up conservatively designed to bound the response of general structural components. In this paper, the previously documented development of the SMT approach and applicable restrictions are reviewed; the design of the Alloy 617 SMT specimen, measurement issues and constraints are presented; initial test results and their application to a prototypic design curve are presented; and further testing and analysis for ASME code incorporation are discussed.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee on Nuclear Power, 2013, “Rules for Construction of Nuclear Facility Components, Section III, Division 1—Subsection NB Class 1 Components,” NB-3222.4, Analysis for Cyclic Operation, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York.
Jetter, R. I., 1998, An Alternate Approach to Evaluation of Creep–Fatigue Damage for High Temperature Structural Design, Vol. 5, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, pp. 199–205.
Kasahara, N., Nagata, T., Iwata, K., and Negishi, H., 1995, “Advanced Creep–Fatigue Evaluation Rule for Fast Breeder Reactor Components: Generalization of Elastic Follow-Up Model,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 155(3), pp. 499–518. [CrossRef]
Broyles, R. K., 1995, “Bellows High Temperature Cycle Life,” Developments in Pressure Vessels and Piping, Vol. 301, J. N.Petrinec, Jr., ed., American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York.
Carroll, M. C., and Carroll, L. J., 2013, “Developing Dislocation Subgrain Structures and Cyclic Softening During High-Temperature Creep–Fatigue of a Nickel Alloy,” Metall. Mater. Trans. A,44(8), pp. 3592–3607. [CrossRef]
Carroll, L. J., Cabet, C., Carroll, M. C., and Wright, R. N., 2013, “The Development of Microstructural Damage During High Temperature Creep–Fatigue of a Nickel Alloy,” Int. J. Fatigue, 47, pp. 115–125. [CrossRef]
ASTM, 2009, “Standard Test Method for Creep–Fatigue Testing,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, Standard No. ASTM E2714-09.
ASTM, 2010, “Standard Practice for Verification and Classification of Extensometer Systems,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, Standard No. ASTM E83-10a.
Carroll, L. J., Cabet, C., Carroll, M. C., and Wright, R. N., 2010, “The Role of Environment on High Temperature Creep–Fatigue Behavior of Alloy 617,” ASME Paper No. PVP2010-26126. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

SMT methodology. (a) Shell structure with stress concentration and elastic follow-up, (b) design curve, and (c) hold time creep–fatigue test with elastic follow-up.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Elastic follow-up factor q as a function of area and length ratios

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Dimensions of solid bar specimen (dimensions in mm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Applied end-displacement profile for one cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Photograph of the failed specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Strain range history

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Hysteresis loops for the first three cycles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Hysteresis loop for the 100th cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Maximum and minimum average stress history in neck region

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Stress relaxation during the hold period for SMT neck region and standard creep–fatigue specimen in Ref. [9]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

SMT design curve for Alloy 617 at 950 °C (illustrative)




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