Application of the Master Curve approach for abnormal material conditions

Tapio Planman, William Server, Kim Wallin, Stan Rosinski

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference article in proceedingsScientificpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The range of applicability of Master Curve testing Standard ASTM E 1921 is limited to macroscopically homogeneous steels with “uniform tensile and toughness properties”.
A majority of structural steels appear to satisfy this requirement by exhibiting fracture toughness data which comply with the assumed KJc vs. temperature dependence and scatter within the specified validity area. As indicated in ASTM E 1921 a criterion for material macroscopic inhomogeneity is often applied using the 2% lower bound (possibly also the 98% upper bound). Data falling below this 2% lower-limit curve may be an indication of material inhomogeneity or susceptibility to grain boundary fracture.
When this situation occurs, it is recommended to analyze the material with the so-called SINTAP procedure, which is intended for randomly inhomogeneous materials to assure a conservative lower-bound estimate. When a data set distinctly consists of two or more different data populations instead of one (due to variation of irradiation dose or specimen extraction depth, for instance) adoption of a bimodal (or a multimodal) Master Curve model is generally appropriate.
These modal models provide information if the deviation of distributions is statistically significant or if different distributions truly exist for values of reference transition temperature, T0, characteristic of separate data populations. In the case of data sets representing thick-walled structures (i.e., reactor pressure vessels), indications of abnormal fracture toughness data can be encountered such that material inhomogeneity or fracture modes other than pure cleavage should be suspected. A state-of-the-art review for extended, non-standard Master Curve data and techniques highlights limits of applicability in situations where the basic ASTM E 1921 procedure is not appropriate for material homogeneity or different fracture modes.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference 2007
EditorsAllen C. Smith
PublisherAmerican Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME
Pages235-242
Volume7
ISBN (Print)0791842851, 9780791842850
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008
MoE publication typeA4 Article in a conference publication
EventASME 2007 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, PVP 2007 - San Antonio, United States
Duration: 22 Jul 200726 Jul 2007

Conference

ConferenceASME 2007 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, PVP 2007
Abbreviated titlePVP 2007
CountryUnited States
CitySan Antonio
Period22/07/0726/07/07

Fingerprint

Fracture toughness
Steel
Pressure vessels
Superconducting transition temperature
Toughness
Dosimetry
Grain boundaries
Irradiation
Testing
Temperature

Cite this

Planman, T., Server, W., Wallin, K., & Rosinski, S. (2008). Application of the Master Curve approach for abnormal material conditions. In A. C. Smith (Ed.), Proceedings of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference 2007 (Vol. 7, pp. 235-242). American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME. https://doi.org/10.1115/PVP2007-26257
Planman, Tapio ; Server, William ; Wallin, Kim ; Rosinski, Stan. / Application of the Master Curve approach for abnormal material conditions. Proceedings of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference 2007. editor / Allen C. Smith. Vol. 7 American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME, 2008. pp. 235-242
@inproceedings{e987fa0eddd04825ac54ea99a6eeb8df,
title = "Application of the Master Curve approach for abnormal material conditions",
abstract = "The range of applicability of Master Curve testing Standard ASTM E 1921 is limited to macroscopically homogeneous steels with “uniform tensile and toughness properties”. A majority of structural steels appear to satisfy this requirement by exhibiting fracture toughness data which comply with the assumed KJc vs. temperature dependence and scatter within the specified validity area. As indicated in ASTM E 1921 a criterion for material macroscopic inhomogeneity is often applied using the 2{\%} lower bound (possibly also the 98{\%} upper bound). Data falling below this 2{\%} lower-limit curve may be an indication of material inhomogeneity or susceptibility to grain boundary fracture. When this situation occurs, it is recommended to analyze the material with the so-called SINTAP procedure, which is intended for randomly inhomogeneous materials to assure a conservative lower-bound estimate. When a data set distinctly consists of two or more different data populations instead of one (due to variation of irradiation dose or specimen extraction depth, for instance) adoption of a bimodal (or a multimodal) Master Curve model is generally appropriate. These modal models provide information if the deviation of distributions is statistically significant or if different distributions truly exist for values of reference transition temperature, T0, characteristic of separate data populations. In the case of data sets representing thick-walled structures (i.e., reactor pressure vessels), indications of abnormal fracture toughness data can be encountered such that material inhomogeneity or fracture modes other than pure cleavage should be suspected. A state-of-the-art review for extended, non-standard Master Curve data and techniques highlights limits of applicability in situations where the basic ASTM E 1921 procedure is not appropriate for material homogeneity or different fracture modes.",
author = "Tapio Planman and William Server and Kim Wallin and Stan Rosinski",
year = "2008",
doi = "10.1115/PVP2007-26257",
language = "English",
isbn = "0791842851",
volume = "7",
pages = "235--242",
editor = "Smith, {Allen C.}",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference 2007",
publisher = "American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME",
address = "United States",

}

Planman, T, Server, W, Wallin, K & Rosinski, S 2008, Application of the Master Curve approach for abnormal material conditions. in AC Smith (ed.), Proceedings of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference 2007. vol. 7, American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME, pp. 235-242, ASME 2007 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, PVP 2007, San Antonio, United States, 22/07/07. https://doi.org/10.1115/PVP2007-26257

Application of the Master Curve approach for abnormal material conditions. / Planman, Tapio; Server, William; Wallin, Kim; Rosinski, Stan.

Proceedings of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference 2007. ed. / Allen C. Smith. Vol. 7 American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME, 2008. p. 235-242.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference article in proceedingsScientificpeer-review

TY - GEN

T1 - Application of the Master Curve approach for abnormal material conditions

AU - Planman, Tapio

AU - Server, William

AU - Wallin, Kim

AU - Rosinski, Stan

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - The range of applicability of Master Curve testing Standard ASTM E 1921 is limited to macroscopically homogeneous steels with “uniform tensile and toughness properties”. A majority of structural steels appear to satisfy this requirement by exhibiting fracture toughness data which comply with the assumed KJc vs. temperature dependence and scatter within the specified validity area. As indicated in ASTM E 1921 a criterion for material macroscopic inhomogeneity is often applied using the 2% lower bound (possibly also the 98% upper bound). Data falling below this 2% lower-limit curve may be an indication of material inhomogeneity or susceptibility to grain boundary fracture. When this situation occurs, it is recommended to analyze the material with the so-called SINTAP procedure, which is intended for randomly inhomogeneous materials to assure a conservative lower-bound estimate. When a data set distinctly consists of two or more different data populations instead of one (due to variation of irradiation dose or specimen extraction depth, for instance) adoption of a bimodal (or a multimodal) Master Curve model is generally appropriate. These modal models provide information if the deviation of distributions is statistically significant or if different distributions truly exist for values of reference transition temperature, T0, characteristic of separate data populations. In the case of data sets representing thick-walled structures (i.e., reactor pressure vessels), indications of abnormal fracture toughness data can be encountered such that material inhomogeneity or fracture modes other than pure cleavage should be suspected. A state-of-the-art review for extended, non-standard Master Curve data and techniques highlights limits of applicability in situations where the basic ASTM E 1921 procedure is not appropriate for material homogeneity or different fracture modes.

AB - The range of applicability of Master Curve testing Standard ASTM E 1921 is limited to macroscopically homogeneous steels with “uniform tensile and toughness properties”. A majority of structural steels appear to satisfy this requirement by exhibiting fracture toughness data which comply with the assumed KJc vs. temperature dependence and scatter within the specified validity area. As indicated in ASTM E 1921 a criterion for material macroscopic inhomogeneity is often applied using the 2% lower bound (possibly also the 98% upper bound). Data falling below this 2% lower-limit curve may be an indication of material inhomogeneity or susceptibility to grain boundary fracture. When this situation occurs, it is recommended to analyze the material with the so-called SINTAP procedure, which is intended for randomly inhomogeneous materials to assure a conservative lower-bound estimate. When a data set distinctly consists of two or more different data populations instead of one (due to variation of irradiation dose or specimen extraction depth, for instance) adoption of a bimodal (or a multimodal) Master Curve model is generally appropriate. These modal models provide information if the deviation of distributions is statistically significant or if different distributions truly exist for values of reference transition temperature, T0, characteristic of separate data populations. In the case of data sets representing thick-walled structures (i.e., reactor pressure vessels), indications of abnormal fracture toughness data can be encountered such that material inhomogeneity or fracture modes other than pure cleavage should be suspected. A state-of-the-art review for extended, non-standard Master Curve data and techniques highlights limits of applicability in situations where the basic ASTM E 1921 procedure is not appropriate for material homogeneity or different fracture modes.

U2 - 10.1115/PVP2007-26257

DO - 10.1115/PVP2007-26257

M3 - Conference article in proceedings

SN - 0791842851

SN - 9780791842850

VL - 7

SP - 235

EP - 242

BT - Proceedings of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference 2007

A2 - Smith, Allen C.

PB - American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME

ER -

Planman T, Server W, Wallin K, Rosinski S. Application of the Master Curve approach for abnormal material conditions. In Smith AC, editor, Proceedings of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference 2007. Vol. 7. American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME. 2008. p. 235-242 https://doi.org/10.1115/PVP2007-26257