Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
1
“true” engineering curve
necking Formation of pores
Pores coalescenceCrack propagation
http://web.umr.edu/~be120/lessons/intro/tension/testing_st/fracture.gif
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
2
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
3
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
4
Metallic samples for tensile test
Yield strength
(s, y, 0,2)
(s, P(0,2) )
Yield strength or proportional limit (Rp0,2)
Yield Strength (YS, Sy), “Yield Strength (offset = 0.2
%)”
Upper and lower yield strength
(ReL)
Upper Yield Strength (UYS) and Lower Yield
Strength (LYS)
(MAX)
(R, Rm)
(Rm)
Tensile Strength (TS, Su, UTS)
elongation %
(At)
Maximum elongation (Elmax) 100
0
0 l
ll
Typical stress-strain curves
failure
tensile strength
upper yield point
lower yield pointy
strain
stress
material creeps (extension without increased stress) or
sample ‘necks’
elasticregion
plasticregion
yield elongation ultimate elongation
ultimate strength
material may follow either path
www.matcoinc.com/images/sem1a.jpg
http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/Materials/Mechanical/Tensile.htm
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
12
COMPRESSION TEST
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
13
Bending or flexural test
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
14
THREE POINT BENDING TEST
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
15
3 and 4 point bending
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
16
Asymmetric 4 point bending for ceramic joined materials
F
le
FeFeFiFi
F
li
Mf
T
T = Fle - li
le + li
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
17
BENDING TEST on Al2O3 and glass
(MPa)
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
18
Flexural strength of ceramics
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
19
TEST:
• Draw versus t (strain vs time) when a material is loaded at = constant, in the elastic field
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
20
TEST• Draw versus t (strain
vs time) when a material is loaded at = constant, in the elastic field
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
21
TEST• Draw versus t (strain
vs time) when a material is loaded at = constant, in the elastic field
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
22
CREEP
Plastic deformation even if stress is in the elastic field
fracture
Elastic deformation
Creep I
Creep III
Creep II
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
23
CREEP
Constant load in the elastic field gang ive to a plastic deformation, progressive to fracture. •Thermally activated process Metals T>0,3-0,4Tfus (K) Ceramics T> 0,6-0,7 Tfus Amorphous materials T>Tg tests: a constant load is applied at a given T, strain is recorded versus time.
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
24
CREEP I: cold working higher than anenaling.
CREEP II: constant strain: balance between cold working and annealing
CREEP III: micro-cavity and other macro-defects at the grain boundaries: fracture of the sample
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
25
Creep II : steady state
nCRnss A
TR
EC
dt
d
exp
C = costant depending on materials
= applied stress
n = coefficient depending on materials 3 < n < 8
ECR = activation Energy
R = perfect gas constant
T = test Temperature
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
26
CREEP curves when increasing T or applied stress
Curve trend when increasing applied stress or test Temperature
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
27
°C
creep curves for a borosilicate glassat 200 and 420 °C, from 18 to 36 MPa)
Creep dCreep degradation of Steelsegradation of Steels for for PipelinesPipelines
100 000 h100 000 h
Initial stateInitial state
Z. L. Kowalewski - IPPT, Poland
Creep Creep development in 13HMF development in 13HMF SteelSteel for for PipelinesPipelines
0 100 200 300 400 500Time [h]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Cre
ep s
trai
n [
%]
As-received
Exploited
144 000 h144 000 h
Initial stateInitial state
0 0.1 0.2 0.3S tra in
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Str
ess
[MP
a]
Z. L. Kowalewski - IPPT, Poland
360 h 550 h 988 h
Microscopic view of specimens (40HNMA Steel) after creep tests up to:
Z. L. Kowalewski - IPPT, Poland
Zbigniew L. KowalewskiE-mail: [email protected] L. KowalewskiE-mail: [email protected]
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
31
How to increase creep resistance?
• High melting T and E materials • Large grains or mono-crystals (small grains
increase grain motion at the grain boundaries)
• Solid sotutions
• Precipitates
• Second phases (composites)
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
32
TEST:
• Apply a tensile stress to a material in the elastic field.
• Repeat the test several times.
• Is it possible to have the material failure ?
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
33
TEST:
• Apply a tensile stress to a material in the elastic field.
• Repeat the test several times.
• Is it possible to have the material failure ?
• If yes, draw a graph with the applied stress () versus the number of cycles (n) necessary to obtain the material failure
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
34
S-N curves: stress (S) vs number of cycles (N) to obtain failure
N
S Fe, Ti, steels
Al, Cu
Dispersion range
Fatigue limit
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
35
Fatigue• Failure of materials due to cyclic loading.
• Main reason of mechanical failure of materials
• Failure happens at stress lower than R or Y
• Catastrophic failure of materials (also for ductile materials !)
• Fatigue tests: materials are cyclically loaded at different stresses up to failure.
• Fatigue limit: when cyclically loaded below this limit, materials do not fail
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
36
Fatigue test
Number of cycles (N)
sample Load N
Load N
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
37
S-N curve
a max min
2S=
N
S max , min : applied stresses during tests
Fracture zone
Safe zone
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
38
Materials and Fatigue
• Between 35-65% of their tensile strength most of metals fail because of fatigue (e.g. Fe, Ti alloys, intrinsical fatigue limit)
• Other metals fail in any case after a given limit (e.g. Al, no intrinsical fatigue limit)
• Fatigue resistence: stress necessary to fracture the material after a given number of cycles at this stress
• Fatigue life: number of cycles necessary to fracture the materials at a given load.
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
39
Fatigue: fracture surface
Starting point (surface defect)
Starting point
Fatigue surface, smoothCatastrophic failure,
rough surface
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
40
Fatigue: fracture surface
crack propagates by repeated cycles – fatigue
final failure is brittle
http://www.resnapshot.com/MP1198-2.jpg
crack propagates by repeated cycles – fatigue
final failure is brittle
http://www.resnapshot.com/MP1198-2.jpg
Fatigue surface, smooth
Catastrophic brittle failure, also on ductile materials,rough surface
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
41
Frattura a fatica
• Ogni processo di frattura a fatica comprende la formazione e la propagazione di cricche– I materiali duttili (metalli, alcuni polimeri) possono
contrastare entro certi limiti la propagazione di una cricca, poi cedono comunque per frattura fragile
– I materiali fragili non sono in grado e vanno incontro a fratture fragili, catastrofiche (ceramici, vetri)
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
42
Ductile and brittle fracture• Ductile fracture: high plastic deformation at the
crack tip, slow crack propagation • Brittle fracture: no (or low) plastic deformation at the
crack tip, quick crack propagation, catastrophic failure)
Al steel
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
43
Mystery failures - de Havilland Comet
• G-ALYY was leased from B.O.A.C. to South African Airways. Flight SA201 was on its way from London to Johannesburg. After a fuel stop in Rome the plane took-off, but only 36 minutes later the radio-contact was interrupted in the area of Stromboli. January 1954.
• The next morning remains were found in the sea. Since the sea was at this place as deep as 1000 meters, no parts of the aircraft could be inspected. Only four days after the crash the Comet flights were again suspended, one of the reasons being the similarities to the YP crash. G-ALYY had only performed 2704 flighthours. A very intensive flight test program was performed in order to find out the reason of the YY and YP crashes, with no special conclusion.
• Only after a very long expensive investigations, which included the assembly of the remains of the crashed YP and the underwater stress test of the YU Comet which came from B.O.A.C. Finally the fuselage of YU broke up on a sharp edge of the forward escape-hatch. After that this rupture was repaired the tests were restarted, but only shortly afterwards the fuselage broke up. This time the rupture started at the upper edge of a window and was three meters long.
• The YP and YY crashes were due to metal fatigue, which took place because of the crystalline changes in the fuselage skin. They were amplified by the high speed and altitude the Comets were operated. The metal fatigue resulted in ruptures of the fuselage, this had as a consequence a terrible decompression at 33Kft, tearing up the plane with all known consequences.
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/8803/comet.htmhttp://www.baaa-acro.com/Photos-2/G-ALYP.jpg
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
44
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
45
Stress intensity factor
]21[21
0
tm
a
• Macro-defects (pores, cracks) in all materials act as stress concentration factors
• True stress on the material at the tip of the crack ( m) is higher than the nominal stress ( o)
t = radius of the cracka = length of a crack on the
surface
• Critical Defects (Griffith Theory, Fracture mechanics, see )
• Without defects, tensile strength would be close to the theoretical values (as it is for monocrystalline materials or small brittle materials)
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
46
Crack propagation
Role of :t = radius of the cracka = length of a crack on the surface
– If plastic deformation is possible, t can increase and decrease m
– If plastic deformation is not possible, there is catastrophic failure.
– Griffith Theory quantify what above with math........
]21[21
0
tm
a
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
47
• Stress intensity factor for long cracks with small radius
m 2 0at
1 2
Callister
o= nominal stress
m= stress on material
K=m/o = stress intensity factor, K=2(a/)1/2
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
48
• During crack propagation surface elastic energy s is released
• Griffith Theory: criterion for crack propagation (energy balance)
c = (2 E s / a)1/2 (brittle materials)
c = (2 E (p + s )/ a)1/2
(ductile, plastic material= surface plastic energy =p)
c = critical stress, crack propagation for >c
Crack propagation and critical parameters
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
49
c = (2 E (p + s )/ a)1/2
Gc= 2 (p + s )
Gc = a / E
crack propagates when:
a / E > Gc (Griffith theory)
K stress intensity factor (MPa m1/2 )K = (GcE)1/2=Y ( a)1/2
For materials containing macroscopic defects, crack propagation occurs when > c
Y adimentional parameter (depends on sample and crack geometry)
Fracture toughness Kc = Y c ( a)1/2 (MPa m1/2)
KIc = Y c ( a)1/2
Fracture thoughness(mode I)
Crack propagation and critical parameters
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
50
KIC critical parameters (defect length and stress) above which there is failure (all materials)
KIc = Y c ( a)1/2
(ASTME 399)
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
51
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
52
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
53
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
54
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
55
How to increase materials fatigue resistance?
• Surface strengthening methods
• Coatings• Suitable mechanical design • Fatigue and fracture
mechanics to model and predict components life !
(seeThermal fatigue, corrosion, …)
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
56
Ni based super-alloy
Fatigue induced intergranular crack
Light (optical) microscopy
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
57
HARDNESS
• Material resistance to surface compression
Applied load
Indenter
Sample
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
58
Vickers Hardness, HV
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
59
Brinell Hardness HB= P/(Dh) = carico/area impronta Vickers Hardness HV= 1.854P/L2
indenter
Sample surface
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
60
Rockwell Hardness measure penetration depth
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
61
example: 60 HR30W= superficial Rockwell hardness =60 scale 30W
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
62
Example: 80 HRB= Rockwell hardness = 80 scale B
Values lower than 20 or higher than 100 are not acceptable
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
63
Correlation hardness/tensile properties
Steel TS: about= 3.45 HB
brassCast iron
steel
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
64
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
65
Hardness profile
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
66
Stress
Resilience modulus (Ur)
Ur = ∫ dbetween 0 and y) (ELASTIC FIELD)
= E yy / E
Ur = ½ y y½ y2 /E
strain
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
67
Toughness and fracture toughness• Toughness = energy absorbed up to fracture = area of / curve
up to fracture ) (J / m3 )• Fracture toughness = fracture resistance in presence of notches
Stress
strain
Brittle, fragile, low ∫ d
Ductile, tough, plastic…..large ∫ d
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
68
Charpy test: Measure of the energy necessary to fracture a notched sample(impact of a hammer)Starting position
hammer
scale
final position
sample
Ruler
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
69
Absorbed impact energy vs temperature for several steels: ductile to brittle transition
Abs
orbe
d im
pact
ene
rgy
Role of C and Fe3C on dislocation motion and ductile to brittle transition
Fracture surfaces after Charpy test (V-notched) at given TDuctile to brittle transition
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
71
Effect of ductile to brittle transition...
• 4 °C
• steel
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
72
ABSORBED ENERGY (CHARPY TEST) vs T FOR DIFFERENT MATERIALS : DUCTILE TO BRITTLE TRANSITION
(Cu, Al, Ni, Ag, Au
(Fe)
AB
SO
RB
ED
EN
ER
GY
(C
HA
RP
Y T
ES
T)
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
73
Ex: Cu, Al, Ag, Au
Ex: Fe, W, CrEx: Mg, Ti, Zn
HEXAGONAL
BCC FCC
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
74
CHARPY tests on steel at different T
at room T (2.22 J/mm2 )
at -200 °C (0.04 J/mm2 )
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
75
Charpy test on steels with same composition but different thermal treatments:
0,89 J/mm2 C40 steel annealed
0,07 J/mm2
C40 steel quenched
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
76
DUCTILITY TEST
o
of
STRAIN
l
ll )(100%
o
o
necking
A
AA f )(100%
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
77
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
78
T1
T2T3
T4
T1<T2<T3<T4
Stress/strain curves for iron vs Temperature
Stress
Strain
Materiali per l’IngegneriaM.Ferraris
80
Stress/strain curves vs Temperature
Fepolymers
Top Related