Creep-fatigue life prediction in terms of nucleation and growth of fatigue crack and creep cavities

  • PDF / 1,332,250 Bytes
  • 7 Pages / 613 x 788.28 pts Page_size
  • 37 Downloads / 297 Views

DOWNLOAD

REPORT


1.5

5

........

O

(b)

(a)

9 ........

~

Cu - R

4

R

I ........

Cu-5%Zn - R

4

3

1

1

.......

3

R

. . . . . . . I 'T . . . . .

4

1

J

3

R

'R

R I

.5

.5

A

1

0 ........ 3

' .......

0 45 (a)

0

........

1

0 90

I ........

.......

3

........

Cu P

0 45

0

90

J

' ' ( e')' ' '

'lJ

' ' ''

I I I,,11

lllll

(d)

.

iiii

1

3

........

0

R

3

r,,, ....

e 45 ( d ) ........

2

R i

0

e 45 (e)

I ........

3

.......

90

0 45

90

1.5

I

90

.......

2

........

0

~

~ .......

0 45 (g)

~

90

i

'

'

.5

I I

i I

i f

]

I I

I I

I I

I t

0 0 45 90 Fig. 13--Comparison of CMTP predictions (/72 yield function) and experimental data (e) for various metals displaying the texture components indicated. (--4--) Taylorassumption;( t3 ) KochendSrfermodel. (a) Copper with a strong {100}(001) texture/3 (b) Iron single crystal sheet: {100}(011) orientation.19 (c) Cold rolled and annealed low C steel: {100}(012) orientation.35 (d) Iron single crystal sheet: {l12}(1T0) orientation.'9 (e) Cold rolled and annealedlow C steel: {411}(14g) orientation.35

with experimentally determined R(O) curves. These are displayed in Figure 16, where the work of Ito et al. 27 is displayed, and in Figure 17, where the results of Parni~re 19are shown. It is evident from Figure 16(c) that the sharp R-value variation is accurately predicted. However, in the case of the other steels, the CMTP predictions underestimate the amplitudes of the R(O) curves, although the positions of the R extrema are well reproduced. The relative inability of the present yield functions to reproduce the full extent of the R-variations can be readily explained by their smooth nature I 1 4 - - VOLUME 19A, JANUARY 1988

i

I

. . . . . . .

i

i

90

~ .......

Cu-20%Zn - F 2

R

0

3

i

e 45 ( f )

R

0

........

0

' ........

0 45 (h) 9o

0

' .......

0

' ........

04s

(i)

Fig. 1 4 - - R ( 0 ) curves for the f o l l o w i n g rolled sheets: (a) C u - R , (b) 5 pet Z n - R , (c) C u - 2 0 pet Z n - R , (d) Cu-P, (e) Cu-5 pet Zn-P, ( f ) 20 pet Zn-P, (g) Cu-F, (h) Cu-5 pet Zn-F, and (i) C u - 2 0 pet Z n - E E x p e r i m e n t a l R - v a l u e s taken f r o m Ref. 18. ( o o ) Fj (n = m = 1.5) a n d ( tJ [] ) F2 criteria used with the K o c h e n d 6 r f e r model. texture d a t a used are those reported in Ref. 18.

I I

90

, ........

I

. . . . . . .

0

Cu-5%Zn - F

R

0

0

90

2

45

.......

,

(c)

Cu-20%Zn - P

I

Ca 9F

.5

0

O 45

3

R ~

0

1

0

~ .......

0

90

0 45

' I '' 1

R

0 ................ 90

i,,,rq

R

1.5

' ........ 45 ( b )

Cu-5%Zn - P

9

,

0

0

90 CuCu(e) 2.6, The

(see Figures 7 through 10), which leads to reduced fluctuations in strain rate through the normality rule. By contrast, in crystallographic calculations,12 the R-value variations are frequently too pronounced. The results published by Stephens, 2~ Kallend and Davies, 28'29and Svensson 3~ on yield stress measurements pertaining to cold rolled and annealed sheet are shown in Figures 18 through 20, respectively. The CMTP calculatio