0
Research Papers: Materials and Fabrication

Low-Constraint Toughness Testing of Two Single-Edge Notched Tension Methods in a Single Specimen

[+] Author and Article Information
Dong-Yeob Park

CanmetMATERIALS,
Natural Resources Canada,
3303-33 Street N.W.,
Calgary, AB T2L 2A7, Canada
e-mail: dong-yeob.park@canada.ca

Jean-Philippe Gravel

CanmetMATERIALS,
Natural Resources Canada,
3303-33 Street N.W.,
Calgary, AB T2L 2A7, Canada
e-mail: jean-philippe.gravel@canada.ca

C. Hari Manoj Simha

CanmetMATERIALS,
Natural Resources Canada,
183 Longwood Road South,
Hamilton, ON L8P0A5, Canada
e-mail: hari.simha@canada.ca

Jie Liang

CanmetMATERIALS,
Natural Resources Canada,
183 Longwood Road South,
Hamilton, ON L8P0A5, Canada
e-mail: jie.liang@canada.ca

Da-Ming Duan

TransCanada,
450-1st Street SW,
Calgary, AB T2P5H1, Canada
e-mail: da-ming_duan@transcanada.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received October 6, 2014; final manuscript received March 4, 2016; published online April 29, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Hardayal S. Mehta.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 138(5), 051401 (Apr 29, 2016) (6 pages) Paper No: PVT-14-1157; doi: 10.1115/1.4032998 History: Received October 06, 2014; Revised March 04, 2016

Single-edge notched tension (SE(T) or SENT) specimens have been increasingly proposed as a low-constraint toughness test to measure toughness of line pipe materials, as the crack tip constraint approximates a circumferential surface flaw in a pipe under loading. The clamped SE(T) single-specimen procedures recently developed by Shen and Tyson (2008, “Fracture Toughness Evaluation of High Strength Steel Pipe,” ASME Paper No. PVP2008-61100; 2008, “Development of Procedure for Low-Constraint Toughness Testing Using a Single-Specimen Technique,” CANMET Materials Technology Laboratory, Technical Report No. 2008-18 (TR)) and Tang et al. (2010, “Development of the SENT Test of Strain-Based Design of Welded Pipelines,” 8th International Pipeline Conference, IPC 2010, Calgary, AB, Canada) have both used in common the use of a clamped single-specimen of similar geometry and relied on the unloading compliance technique for crack size estimation. In the former case, a single clip gauge is attached to the integral knife edge and the crack-tip opening displacement (CTOD) is estimated by means of a J-integral-to-CTOD conversion, similar to the procedure of ASTM E1820-11. The latter uses a pair of clip gauges mounted on an attachable raised set of knife edges to estimate CTOD at the original crack tip position by a triangulation rule. Consolidating these two sets of clip gauges in a specimen makes direct comparisons of two SE(T) methods under identical test conditions: material, specimen geometry, equipment, test temperature, and operator (Weeks et al., 2013, “Fracture Toughness Instrumentation Techniques for Single-Specimen Clamped SE(T) Tests on X100 Linepipe Steel: Experimental Setup,” 6th Pipeline Technology Conference, Ostend, Belgium). In this study, SE(T) testing employing these two SE(T) methods on a single specimen was conducted on B × B shallow-cracked (a/W ∼ 0.35) specimens of two X70 pipeline girth welds. This paper discusses details of the two SE(T) methods and techniques on the same specimen.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

An example of specimen geometry with a notch placed at HAZ for the 13.4-mm thick pipe (unit: millimeter)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

SE(T) setup using three clip gauges on a single specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Triple-clip-gauge mounting fixtures: (a) photo of the fixtures on a specimen and (b) illustration of the side view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison of CMODs directly measured from the clip gauge on the integral knife edge (i.e., V) and δM estimated from Eq. (3) from the double clip gauges: (a) an example of load-CMOD curves and (b) all specimens

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Unloading compliance comparisons

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

J–R curves of the single clip gauge method using CMOD measurements, V, and CMOD estimations, δM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

CTOD-resistance curves from the single and double clip gauge SE(T) methods for 17.8-mm thick pipe (a/W ∼ 0.35): (a) HAZ and (b) WM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparisons of measured and unloading-compliance predicted crack size from both 17.8- and 13.4-mm thick pipes (aoq: adjusted initial crack size and ap: final crack size)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparisons of CTODs calculated from the double clip gauge method using measurements of various combinations of two clip gauges at different heights: (a) an example of CTOD-resistance curves of SE(T) HAZ specimen of 17.8-mm thick pipe girth weld and (b) all data

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