Dr C S Wiesner, TWI, Cambridge, UK and Mr H MacGillivray [1], Imperial College, London, UK Presented at 1999 TAGSI Seminar - 'Fracture, Plastic Flow and Structural Integrity' (dedicated to Sir Alan Cottrell in the year of his Eightieth Birthday), Held at TWI, Cambridge, UK, 29 April 1999
[1]Note: Mr MacGillivray is chairman of the ESIS TC5 committee, which is concerned with dynamic mechanical testing.
Abstract
An overview of the effects of elevated ('dynamic') loading rates on the tensile and initiation toughness properties of steels and their effect on structural behaviour is given. Issues affecting engineering critical assessments are also considered. Dynamic loading rates affect both the material resistance and the structural response of engineering components and it is the combination of these two influences which determines the structural behaviour.
Because of inherent complexities of testing at high loading rates, the development of suitable test techniques for measuring both tensile and fracture toughness properties has been a topic of marked investment in the last 40 years or so, but increasing consensus has now been achieved leading to the development of test standards. Generally, the effect of increasing loading rate is to increase strength (positive strain rate dependence) and the strain rate sensitivity increases with temperature, but there are exceptions when dynamic strain ageing effects intervene. The effect of loading rate on the fracture toughness of ferritic steels is dependent on overall material behaviour: for temperatures below the brittle to ductile transition region, toughness decreases with increasing loading rate. At upper shelf temperatures, the ductile initiation toughness and tearing resistance generally increases with loading rate, but exceptions exist which are outlined in the paper. In or near the transition region, increasing loading rates can cause a shift from fully ductile behaviour at static rates to brittle behaviour at high rates of loading. The brittle to ductile transition temperature of ferritic steels increases with increasing loading rates and methods have been proposed to predict this shift.
1. Introduction
It is well known that an increase in the rate of loading affects material properties in steel. This is recognised in national and international test standards for tensile and fracture toughness testing by prescribing a maximum rate of loading beyond which the test standard is no longer valid. For steels, the main effect of increasing loading rate is an increase of the yield and tensile strength which generally leads to a reduction of cleavage fracture toughness. This is implicitly recognised in the widely used Charpy test where a notched bar is impact tested in three point bending at an initial displacement rate of 5.5m/s, so as to include the detrimental effect of loading rate in the toughness determination.
For more accurate, fracture mechanics-based, structural integrity evaluations, Charpy results are not sufficient so fracture toughness input and fracture toughness tests using pre-cracked specimens are generally employed. When characterising the fracture toughness of an engineering component, the rate of loading to which the structure may be subjected should be taken into account, and the fracture toughness test should be carried out at the appropriate rate, so as to simulate the structural configuration of interest. Mechanistically, the reduction in cleavage toughness generally observed with increasing loading rate is due to the increase in yield strength associated with high loading rates, which elevates the crack tip stresses such that critical conditions in the crack tip region are reached at lower levels of remote load than under static conditions.
There are many examples where structural behaviour is affected by dynamic loading rates. For example, brittle fracture events in steel frame buildings during recent earthquakes in Japan and North America are likely to have been influenced by dynamic loading rate effects caused by the rapid ground movement during the earthquake event. Postulated high loading rate earthquake events are also worst-case accident scenarios during the design of nuclear pipework and storage tanks in certain locations. Other design scenarios causing high loading rates are accidental drops of heavy lids on nuclear storage containers, and impacts in land, sea and air transport.
Typical examples of loading rates are given in Table 1, which was produced from information given in Ref 1 to 3 . These should be taken as estimates only since the exact values will depend strongly on local geometry, loading configuration and flaw dimensions. Loading rates in Table 1 are expressed as strain rate, ε, and the rate of increase of the linear elastic stress intensity factor, Κ. The latter parameter is a more appropriate measure for loading rates in fracture mechanics specimens and flawed structures as it includes the relevant geometries and flaw dimensions.
Table 1 Typical loading rates in some engineering components
Application ε, s
-1 Κ, MPa √m
0.5s
-1 Storage tanks, pressure vessels 10
-6 to 10
-4 10
-2 to 1 Bridges, cranes earthmoving 10
-2 to 0.1 10 to 10
3 Earthquake loading
Marine collisions 0.1 to 10 100 to 10
4 Land transport, aircraft undercarriage 10 to 1000 10
3 to 10
6 Explosion, ballistics 10
4 to 10
6 plus 10
7 to 10
10 plus
The present paper provides an overview on test techniques for determining tensile and fracture toughness properties under dynamic conditions and examples of effects of dynamic rates on tensile properties and fracture toughness, as well as structural assessment considerations. The emphasis is on ferritic steels with some consideration given to stainless steels.
2. Experimental Methods
2.1 Introductory Remarks
Dynamic test methods and standardisation of such methods are developing rapidly. This overview paper cannot cover every aspect in detail, and it is inevitable that there will be some omissions.
Dynamic tests have been used and standardised to characterise qualitatively material properties for many years. Such tests include Charpy and Pellini drop-weight tests. Although valuable for comparative purposes, they offer little detailed insight into failure mechanisms and quantifiable properties. This has led to instrumented versions of these tests, and to new test methods being developed over the past 20 years or so. A number of test techniques, initially developed for research purposes, are now being refined and compared to establish if they can meet the strict requirements of standardisation. Repeatability, accuracy and ease of use are vital if such methods are to become accepted. There is co-operation within Europe and with the USA to ensure that any methods are truly international. Seminars arranged by ESIS TC5 at Mol, Belgium in April 1994 [4] , and by ASTM in Seattle, USA in May 1999, showed that there remains great interest in developing and using dynamic test methods.
Dynamic testing is usually expensive. Special testing machines may have to be used. Furthermore, it is normally necessary to instrument the test machine and/or the specimen in some way. High speed recording equipment will be needed, and the analysis of the test date may be complex. Skilled and experienced personnel will be needed to perform the tests and evaluate the results correctly. Extra safety precautions need to be taken. For all these reasons, it is increasingly realised in Europe and the USA that such tests should be performed and analysed using, as far as possible, agreed international standard methods. This paper will consider dynamic tensile testing and fracture testing in both linear-elastic and elastic-plastic regions.
There are three general regions at which dynamic tests can be performed.
- Medium rates, when inertial effects are negligible or can be controlled and quasi-static analyses remain applicable.
- High rates where inertia dominates, and special measurement and analyses techniques must be applied.
- Very high rates where stress wave loading is dominant.
This paper is limited to the first two regions.
2.2 Fracture Toughness Test Methods and Standards
The British standard BS 6729:1987 was the first standard for fracture testing at dynamic loading rates. It is based on static procedures with allowances made for dynamic condition. Round-robin testing carried out during the development of the standard is reported in
Ref.1. The standard gives procedures for determining K
Ic and CTOD values at Κ extending from the quasi-static region at 2.5MPam
0.5s
-1 to dynamic loading at 3000MPam
0.5s
-1, corresponding to machine crosshead rates of about 0.02 to 100mm/s. It is to be replaced in due course by BS 7448:Part 3.
For Κ exceeding 3000MPam 0.5s -1, an appendix exists in BS 6729 which gives guidance as to how to carry out tests. The main issue with such high loading rates is that conventional instrumentation is no longer appropriate to record the actual conditions experienced by the specimen. For example, Fig.1 (from Ref 30 ) shows load-time plots recorded during static and dynamic fracture tests using both a conventional load cell and a calibrated strain gauge attached directly to the specimen. It can be seen ( Fig.1a) that both give identical results under static conditions, but only the strain gauge is responsive enough to record load data at high loading rates ( Fig.1b), whilst the conventional load cell data are dominated by inertial effects.
√in ( ≈ 44MPa √m) transition temperature is shifted by about 170°F ( ≈ 100°C)), whilst there is no shift for the very high strength steel (
Fig.9b).
Fig.9a. Effect of temperature and strain rate on crack toughness of ABS-C steel [19] √m) are observed. However, at impact loading rates, a change in fracture mode occurs in some specimens and these exhibit markedly decreased fracture toughness (minimum value less than 2000N/mm
3/2 ( ≈ 60MPa √m). Mechanistically, this effect can be ascribed to the increase in yield strength with loading rate. In the crack tip region this means that higher crack opening stresses can be achieved before plastic flow occurs. If the loading rate-induced yield strength elevation is sufficient, the opening stresses can reach critical cleavage stress magnitude and hence induce a change in fracture mode from ductile to brittle.
√m/s which by far exceeds the limit of the static test standard. Hence, a fracture assessment of a bridge should be based on fracture toughness values determined at the appropriate loading rate.
Fig.19. Toughness results and loading rates in short span bridges [24] √m/s), static fracture toughness transition temperature, T
o stat
(in °K for a loading rate, of Κ = 1MPa √m/s) and the static yield strength,
Equations [1] and [2] permit predictions of material property changes to be made when material data cannot be generated. This enables preliminary engineering assessments to be made to study the sensitivity of the integrity of a particular component with respect to the effect of dynamic loading rates.
Fig.21. Predictions of fracture toughness transition temperature shifts for a ratio of dynamic to static loading rate of 10,000 according to the method proposed by Wallin [29]
|
5. Summary and Concluding Remarks
An overview of the effects of high loading rates on the tensile and initiation toughness properties of steels and their effect on structural behaviour is given. Issues affecting engineering critical assessments are also considered. Dynamic loading rates affect both the material resistance and the structural response of engineering components and it is the combination of these two influences which determines the structural behaviour of uncracked components. For structures or components containing crack-like flaws, it is the effect of loading rate on the yield strength which affects crack tip stress fields and through this the initiation fracture toughness at elevated loading rates. Again, it is the combination of the structural response to high loading rates and the effect on dynamic fracture toughness which determines structural behaviour of flawed components.
Because of the inherent complexities of investigating material behaviour under high loading rates, the development of suitable test techniques for measuring both strength/fracture toughness has been a topic of marked investment in the last 40 years or so, but increasing consensus has now been achieved leading to the development of test standards.
There is an important effect of loading rate on tensile properties, especially at very high rates. Generally, the effect of increasing loading rate is to increase strength (positive strain rate dependence), but microstructural influences (such as dynamic strain ageing) can cause negative strain rate dependence). Strain rate sensitivity increases with temperature.
The effect of loading rate on the initiation fracture toughness of ferritic steels is dependent on overall material behaviour. For temperatures below the brittle to ductile transition region (i.e. for cleavage toughness or overall brittle behaviour), toughness decreases with increasing loading rate. At upper shelf temperatures, the ductile initiation toughness and tearing resistance generally increases, but this depends on strain hardening behaviour as decreases in ductile toughness with increasing loading rates have been observed for certain ferritic steels with low yield to tensile strength ratios. In or near the transition region, increasing loading rates can cause a shift from fully ductile behaviour at static rates to brittle behaviour at high rates of loading. The brittle to ductile transition temperature of ferritic steels increases with increasing loading rates and methods have been proposed to predict this shift.
6. References
Copyright by TWI, 1999
|
1 |
P.R. Christopher et al |
(IIW Commission X, UK Briefing Group on Dynamic Testing), 'Some Proposals for Dynamic Toughness Measurement', Proc. Conf 'Dynamic Fracture Toughness, The Welding Institute, 1977. |
|
2 |
M.G. Dawes, |
'The Relevance of Deformation Rate to Brittle Fracture Initiation', The Welding Institute Research Bulletin, 1976, pp.153-156. |
|
3 |
|
WES 2805:1997, 'Method of Assessment for Flaws in Fusion Welded Joints with Respect to Brittle Fracture and Fatigue Crack Growth', Japan Welding Engineering Society, 1997. |
|
4 |
|
ESIS TC5 publication of Mol Seminar: 'Evaluating material properties by dynamic testing', ESIS Publication No. 20, EMAP, 1996. |
|
5 |
M. Böhme and J.F. Kalthoff, |
'On the quantification of Dynamic Effects in Impact Loading and the Practical Application for K Id Determination', Journal de Physique, Colloque C5, Vol.46, August 1985, pp.C5-213 + C5-218. |
|
6 |
H.J. MacGillivray, |
'Project to Develop a Standard Method of Fracture Toughness Testing at Very High Loading Rates', Prepared by the European Group on Fracture Working Party on High Rate Conventional Fracture Testing, DTI Ref. RTP2/155/78, 1990. |
|
7 |
J. Duffy and C.F. Shih, |
'Dynamic Fracture Toughness Measurement Methods for Brittle and Ductile Materials', Proc Conf ICF 7, Vol.1, pp.633-642, Pergamon Press, 1984. |
|
8 |
|
Proposed standard method for instrumented impact testing of sub-size Charpy V-notch specimens of steel, draft 7, ESIS, TC5, June 1997. |
|
9 |
H.J. MacGillivray, V. Grabulov and E.R. Akum, |
'Development of the D.C. Potential Drop Method for Dynamic J-R Curve Testing of Charpy Specimens, International', International Symposium on Welding and Testing of Metal Structures in Civil Engineering, Belgrade, 1987. |
|
10 |
R. Salzbrenner and T.B. Crenshaw, |
Multiple Specimen J-Integral Testing at Intermediate Rates, Experimental Mechanics, September 1990, pp.217-223/ |
|
11 |
M. Satoh, T. Funada, Y. Urabe and K. Hojo, |
'Measurement of Rapid-Loading Fracture Toughness J Id', Factors That Affect the Precision of Mechanical Tests, ASTM STP 1025, R. Papirno and H.C. Weiss, Eds, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1989, pp.63-76. |
|
12 |
J.A. Joyce and E.M. Hackett, |
'An Advanced Procedure for J-R Curve testing Using a Drop Tower', Nonlinear Fracture Mechanics: Vol.1 - Time-Dependent Fracture, ASTM STP 995, A. Saxena, J.D. Landes and J.L. Bassani, Eds, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1989, pp.298-317. |
|
13 |
C.S. Wiesner, |
'Dynamic J-R Curve Determination', Oberflächen Werkstoffe, Vol.34, No.12, 1993, pp.12-16. |
|
14 |
H.J. MacGillivray and C.E. Turner, |
'A comparison of Dynamic R-Curve Methods', Fourth International Conference on the Mechanical Properties of Materials at High Rates of Strain, Oxford, 1989. |
|
15 |
|
Proposed standard method for dynamic testing, Draft 4, ESIS TC5, March 1997. |
|
16 |
|
Metals Handbook, 9 th Edition, Vol.8 Mechanical Testing. |
|
17 |
H.J. MacGillivary and A. Klenk, |
'High rate tensile testing - progress towards a standard method', Euromat Conference 1994, Hungary. |
|
18 |
M.J. Manjoine, |
'Influence of Rate of Strain and Temperature on Yield Stresses of Mild Steel', J. Appl. Mech, Vol.II, 1944, pp.1-211 to 1-218. |
|
19 |
A.K. Shoemaker and S.T. Rolfe, |
'Static and Dynamic Low-Temperature K Ic Behaviour of Steels', Transactions of the ASME, 1969, pp.512-518. |
|
20 |
A.K. Shoemaker and S.T. Rolfe, |
'The Static and Dynamic Low-Temperature Crack-Toughness Performance of Seven Structural Steels', Engineering Fracture Mechanics, Vol.2, Pergamon Press, UK, 1971, pp.319-339. |
|
21 |
D.R. Ireland, |
'Critical Review of Instrumented Impact Testing', Proc. Conf. Dynamic Fracture Toughness, Paper 5, The Welding Institute, 1977. |
|
22 |
A.M. Priest, |
'Influence of Strain Rate and Temperature on the Fracture and Tensile Properties of Several Metallic Material', Proc. Conf. Dynamic Fracture Toughness, Paper 10, The Welding Institute, 1977. |
|
23 |
D.L. Rudland, C. Marscall and G.M. Wilowski, |
'Effect of Dynamic Loading Corresponding to Seismic Rates on the Fracture Toughness of Nuclear Piping Steels,' ASME PVP - Vol.350, ASME 1997, pp.89-96. |
|
24 |
M. Lorentzon and K. Eriksson, |
'Influence of Intermediate Loading Rates and Temperature on the Fracture Toughness of Ordinary Carbon-Manganese Structural Steels', Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structure, 1998, Vol.21, pp.805-817. |
|
25 |
J.M Barson, |
'Development of the ASSHTO Fracture Toughness Requirements', Engg. Frac. Mechs., Vol.7, 1975, pp.605-618. |
|
26 |
S.T. Rolfe and J.M. Barson, |
'Fracture and Fatigue Control in Structures, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1977, p.86. |
|
27 |
J.M. Barson, |
'Effect of Temperature and Rate of Loading on the Fracture Behaviour of Various Steels', Proc. Conf. Dynamic Fracture Toughness, Paper 31, The Welding Institute, 1977. |
|
28 |
R.A. Ainsworth and B.K. Neale, |
'Effect of Strain Rate and Temperature on Fracture Toughness', Nuclear Electric Technology Division Report TD/SEB/MEM/4021, June 1992. |
|
29 |
K. Wallin, |
'Effect of Strain Rate on the Fracture Toughness Reference Temperature, T o, for Ferritic Steels', Proc. Conf. 'Recent Advances in Fracture' (R K Mahidhara, Ed), pp.171-181, The Minerals, Metal and Materials Society, 1997. |
|
30 |
R.L. Jones and P.C. Davies, |
'Experimental characterisation of dynamic tensile and fracture toughness properties', Fat. Frac. Engng. Mat. Struct., Vol.12, (1989), 423-437. |