+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

Date post: 13-Apr-2022
Category:
Upload: others
View: 4 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
123
PB82-258765 Relation of Teat Values to. Fatigue Cracking in Bridges MisBOuri Univ., Colwabia Prepared for Pederal Highway Adainlstration Jefferson City, NO Aug 81 1 ... .1 111,7 ' .. e ,. a. oJ 7 F1711 .IM .. tlSI -
Transcript
Page 1: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

PB82-258765

Relation of Toughn~ss Teat Values to.Fatigue Cracking in Bridges

MisBOuri Univ., Colwabia

Prepared for

Pederal Highway AdainlstrationJefferson City, NO

Aug 81

1... .1111,7 ' .. e ,.a. oJ 7F1711 .IM ..tlSI

-

Page 2: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

T~chnical I~cport Documentation Pog.1. R.porl No. r,.;."..;-.=. N;;:

-----_.__._- -----,3. Re-C:lplent \ C ,:'o'og NG !

FHWA/MO-78/2 PII! 25876 5 i,_._- I4. Ti.l. Ot'Id Subtill. S. Report Do'.

IRelation of Toughness Test Values to Fatigue August 1981Cracking in Bridges 6. P.rformlng 0"90nl r:otlcn Code

8. P.rforming O,gonization Reporf No.7. Au.ho,I.)

IJames W. Baldwin, Jr. and James A. Cooper9. P.rfo,m'ng O'goniaotion Nome and Addr.,. 10. wo.~ Un,. No. CTRAIS)

Department of Civil Engi neerf ng FCP 4SL1-012University of Missouri - Columbia II. CContract or Grant No.

Columbia. Missouri13. T~p. 01 R.po" ond P."od Cover.d

12. Sponlorin9 Agency Na",. ond Add,••• Final ReportFeb. 1978 to August 1981

Missouri Highway and Transportation Department14. Sponsoring Agency Code

80123 S1.5. Suppl.m.n'ar~ Nal..

Prepared in coopration with the United States Department of Transportation,Federal Highway Administration

16, Ab.'rac'

Tension. Charpy. dynamic tear. C-399, and da/dN tests were conducted on threeheats of A36 steel cut from a highway bridge which had been tested to failurein fatigue. Tension tests and E-399 tests were conducted at temperaturesranging from 700F to -2000F while all other tests were conducted in thetemperature range from 700r to -SOoF.

During field testing, the girder from one heat appeared to be more susceptibleto fatigue failure than the others. but there were no significant differencesin either fracture toughness or laboratory crack growth rates. Crack growthrates decreased with decreasing temperature, and did not appear to be influencedby fracture toughness. The E-399 plain strain fracture toughness test wasfound to be unsuitable for A-36 steel.

-18. Di .tribution S,ot.-nen,17. K.~ Wor".

Fatigue. fracture toughness, bri dges. Mo restrictions. This document issteel. material char~cterization available to the public through the

National Information Service.Spdngfield, Virginia 22161

19. S.c-uri'y Clo..,if. (of this report) :20. S.tu,ity Cl .....il. (0' .hi .. pa,.l 21. No. of P ag•• 22. Prite

Unclassified Unclassified l1¥-

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-721 Reproduction of completed pOlle outhori led

•I

Page 3: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

RELATION OF TOUGHNESS

TEST VALUES TO

FATIGUE CRACKING IN BRIDGES ~

STUDY 78-2

Prepared for

MISSOURI HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT

by

JAMES W BALDWIN. JR.

and

JAME:.S A. COOPER

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA

COLUMBIA. MISSOURI

August 1981

in cooperation with

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

Theopinions. findings. andconclusions expressed in this publiCatiOnare not nec:esaarity those of the Department of Transportation, FederalHighw8y AclministratiOn or the Missouri HighWay and TransportationDepartmen1. This report does not constitute a standard. specification. orregulation.

Page 4: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

t i

ABSTRACT

Tension, Charpy, dynamic tear, C-3'9, and da/dN te.t.

were conducted on three heats o~ A36 steel cut from. high­

w.y bridge whtch had been tested to f.ilure in fatigue.

Tension test. and E-39~ tests were conducted at temperature.

ranging fro.70·F to -200°F while all other tests were

conducted in the temperature range from 70°F to -50°F.

During field t.sting, the girder from one heet appeared

to be more susceptible to fatigue failure than the others,

but there wer. no significant diff.rences in either fracutre

toughness or laboratory crack growth rate •. Creek growth

rat •• d.cr •••• d with decre•• ing temper.ture. and did not

appear to be influenc.d by fractur. toughne.s. Tho E-399

plain .train fracture toughne.s t.st was found to be unsuit­

able for A-36 steel.

Page 5: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

f f t

TABLE Of CONTENTS

unueT "list of Illustration.

List of Table. v t I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ' ....... vHI

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION

1. 1 Baek~U'ound

1.2 Objective.

1.3 Fatigue D.sion

1.~ Fatigu. Craek Growth Analv.i.

1

I

2

2

a

14

14

15

17

17

17

H

36

. . . . . 36

47

47

47

49

57

6'

63

73

79

....

CHAPTER 3 - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

3.1 Test Specl.ens

3.2 Tension Test

3.3 Ch.,.pv Te.t.

3.4 Dvne.ie Te.,. Te.t.

3.5 E-399 T.st.

CHAPTER 2 - SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 Su••• ry

CHAPTER 5 - RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

5.1 G.n.,..l Ob.ervation. • ••••

5.2 Effect of Te.p.r.tu,.e

5.S Eff.ct. of M.t.,.ial Prop.,.tl ••

2.2 Coneillsions

2.: Reco••endetions

CHAPTER 4 - FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH TESTS

4.1 Speci •• n D•• tgn end P,..p.,..tlon

4.2 T•• t Equlp••nt

4.3 T.st ProCedU,.e3

4.4 D.t. Reduction Methods

Page 6: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

5.4 Effect of Load Shedd;ng

REFERENCES

APPENDIX

i v

79

Page 7: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

LIST OF ItlUSTRATIONS

Figure 1 - Typical stre~~ v 5. CycieUI to Failur.

Figure 2 - Life Span of a structure

Figure 3 - Three "'ode Types

Figure 4 - Typical Crack length vs. Number of Cycles

Figure S - Determining AK and da/dN

Figure 6 - Regions of Fatigue Crack Growth

Figure 7 - Bridge layout and Heat Number!!

Figure 8 - Specimen Locations, .; .4 Bottom 1

Figure 9 - Specimen Locatipns, 4 ,4 Bottom 2

Figure 10 - Specimen locations. 4.4 Bottom 3

figure 11 - Specimen Locations. 4 • 4 Bottom 4

Figure 12 - Specimen Locations. 4 • 1 Botton:

Figure 13 - Specimen Locations, 2, ;) Top

Figure 14 - Specimen Locations. 2.3 Bottom

Figure 15 - Specimen Locations, 6,2 Bottom

Figure 16 - Specimen Locations, 4,2A Bottom

Figure 17 - Specimen loeations. 4.2C Top

Figure 18 - Speeimen Locations. 4,28 Top 1

Fioure 19 - Specimen locations. 4.28 Top 2

Figure 20 - Tensile Test Specimen

Figure 21 - Tensile Test Results

Figure 22 - Charpv Test Specimen

Figure 23 - Charpy V-Notch Test Results

Figure 24 - Dynamic Tear Test Specimen

Figure 25 - Dyne,,'; e Tear Test Results

Figure 26 - ASHI E-399 Specimen

Figure 27 - AST,., E-399 Results

Figure 23 - da/dN Specimen Design

Figura 29 - I''lTS Machine!

Figure 30 - Gaertner Traveling Mieroscope

Figure 31 - Cold Test Schematic

Figure 32 - Cold Temperetu .. e Box with Specimen

Installed

Figure 33 - Specimen Installed in Clevis8s

Figure 34 - Seven Point Polynomial Method

v

4

5

7

10

11

12

18

21

2.3

24

;'5

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

35

37

38

39

40

41

43

43

50

51

52

53

56

59

Page 8: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

vi

Figure 35 - Reduced Data for Heat 271,981 at - 50° F

Using Secant Method 61

Figure 36 - Reduced Data for Heat 271,981 at -SOoF

Using Polynomial Method 62

Figure H - dll/dN vs. AK % for Heat 282,484 at -SOoF 64

Figure 3 !~ - da/dH vs. AK % for Hea t 282,484 at 0° F 6~

Figure 39 - da/dH vs. AK :r for HQa t 282,484 at 70° F 66

F i gu r. 40 - da/dH V3. AK% for Heat 351,680 at -50°F 67

Figure 41 - da/dH vs. AKx for Heat 351,680 at 0° F 68

Figure 42 - da/dN vs. AK% for Heat 3S1,680 lit 70°F 69

Figure 43 - da/dH v s . AKx fOI" Heat 271,981 at -50°F 70

Figure 44 - da/dH v s . AKx for Heat 271,981 at 0° F 71

Figure 45 - da/dN v s . AKx for Heat 271,981 at 70°F 72

Figure 46 - Results fo I" Heat 282,484 75

Figure 47 - Results for Heat 351,680 76

Figure 48 - Results for Heat 271,981 77

Figura 49 - Results at -SOoF 80

Figure SO - Results at 0 0 F U

Figuro 51 - Results at 70 0 F 82

Page 9: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

y i i

L1ST OF TAH ES

TABLE 1 HEAT NUMBERS 19

TABLE 2 CHEI'1ICAL PROPERTI ES 1 9

TABLE 3 TEST SCHEDULE 20

TAH E 4 ASTM E-399 TEST RESULTS 44

TABLE 5 SECANT METHOD SAI'1PLE CAlCULATIONS 60

TABLE 6 LINEAR REDUCTIOH RESULTS 74

Page 10: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

vi i i

ACKNOWl EDGEMEN T

The work reported herein was conducted in the Civil

Engineering Laboratori.~ u~ the University of Missouri

-Columbia under sponsorship of the Department of Transporta­

tion. Federal Highwr.y Administration and the Missouri High­

way and Tran~portation Department.

Sincere appreciation is extended to personnel at the

Bridge Division of the Mis50uri Highway and Transportation

Department and the Division Office of the Federal Highway

Ad~inistration for their support and helpful suggestions

during the course of this study.

Page 11: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

1.1 BACKGROUNp

CHAPTER - INT~ODUCTIOH

1

While the number of catastrophic failures in bridges is

low, the fact that they do occur has led to increasing

concern within the engineering profession about tho poten­

tial for f~tigue and brittl~ failure in steel bridges.

Relatively recent failures resulting in human 1055 have been

largely responsible for heightening this concern. The fact

that some bridges develop cracks under service conditions

while others uf essentially the same design do not, leads t~

some speculation that the problem is at least In part

related to some property of the material. As a result there

has been a recent move towards adoption of fracture tough­

ness acceptance specifications for bridge steels.

Unfortunately, there is a great deal of controversy

surrounding the type of acceptance test for such a specifi­

cation. On the one hand there i~ the AST" E-399 test which

is theoreticallY best but is almost prohibitively e~pensive,

while on the other hand there is the Charpy test which is

quite economical but is not universally accepted as valid.

Between these two are the Dynamic Tear and Bend tests. The

problem is complicated by a lack of knowledge concerning

threshold values Tor any of these test~ beyond which crack­

ing becomes a problem in actual bridge structures.

During the full scale feti~ue test Cl)M of a highway

bridge in southeast Missouri, it became evident that certain

girders. Which were identifiable by heat numbers, were more

prone to cracking tha~ the others. At midspan, one girder

fractcred twice through the bottom flange and web, Nhil. the

other three were loaded to essentially the sam. stress

MNumbers in p.r.nthesi~

references

refer to the list of

Page 12: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

load cycles expected during the service life of the member

is equal to or less thDn the numb~r of cycles to fai lure at

the design stress. This is known as "safe-life" design.

Typically. fatigue design data are presented in the

form of an S-H curve; a plot of possible stress fluctuations

(5) versus the number of cycles to failure (N). as shown in

Figure 1 (2). It h~s long been recognized that the S-N

curve is a function of material properties. geometry of the

member, and fabrication flaws. As a result. S-N diagrams

are determined by conducting fatigue tests on specimens

design~d with the particular material to be used and to

simulate fabrication flaws and details.

Because fabrication flaws are distributed randomlv.

there is considerable scattor in the data from these tests.

As a result of this scattEr and uncertainties conc~rnin9 the

magnitude and number of stress cvcles during the service

life of the structure. it is necessary to apply rather large

safety factors in safe-life design to ensure against failure

in the worst possible casa.

In recent years, it has been recognized that there

exist three distinct stages in fatigue failure (See Figure

2) (3). First is an "initiation" stage where an initial

flaw develops into a sharp-tipped notch or crack. The

number of stress cycles during this stage is a function of

material properties. magnitud~ of repeated load. geometry of

the member. and geometry of the flaw.

The second or "growth" stage is the period during which

the net cross section of the member is gradually reduced by

stable growth of the crack under repeated cyclic loading.

In bridges. this growth stage usually spans a period of one

or more vears during which it is possible to detect and

repair the crack. Growth rate is primarily a function of

stress amplitude and material properties.

Eventually. the c~eck reduce. the cross section to the

critical point where there is either unstable crack growth

resulting in sudden failure due to brittle fracture. ductile

tearing, or general yielding. This third or "failure"

Page 13: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

loading applied to

steel cut from the

2

levels and no cracks dev.lop.d. In addition, at the ends of

the eight cov.r plates the bottOM girder flanges develuped

craeks at all locations while onlY two of the eight top

flanges dev.loped cracks. Upon completion of the fatigue

test. arrangements were made with the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers to salvage material frOM critical sections as the

bridge was d.molished.

1.2 OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this work were:

1) To examine the effect of cyclic

st.el sp.clm.ns mad. from A-36

"issouri test bridge.

2) To .xamine the difference in fatigue crack growth

rat. between three different he.ts of .teel used.

3) To examine the difference in fatigue crack growth

rat. with varying temperatures,

4) To det.r.in. the r.lative effectiven.ss of conv.n­

tional fracture toughness t.sts in determining the

susceptibility of A-36 bridge steel to fatigue

cracking. and

5) To d.termin. which fractur. toughn.ss t.st is best

a. an acc.ptanc. t.st for fatigue design.

1,3 FATIGUE DESIGN

fatigue i. the t.chnical ter. for failures which ar.

the r.sult of cyclic loads on a structura. Nor.ally the

a.plitud. of the no.inal cyclic .tr.ss i. below the yi.ld

str.ngth.

Traditionally fatigue ha. b.en treated a. a total-lif.

phenom.non. The nu.ber of load cycle. ~hat will cau •• fail­

ur. is determined a. a function of the cyclic service

stress. Th••••b.r i. d•• ign.d such that the total nu.ber of

Page 14: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

1Smax

•••

o

• oo •

••---+

4

~ signifies no failure

NUMBER OF CYCl ES ~

Figure 1 Typical Stress vs. Cycles to Failure

Page 15: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

Q).....CD .=-:.= c ,c .2 Io - Q)

~:-=:0)- ,

n:l ~-a.~

0- ClI

I~c .... 0 ::l0._ ...

HIu::l

I '"...(Il

CD 10

I lU ow(.) 0en c:

I Cl 100 0-

<Il.GI

/ z ow. ....fI'J o-lQ)

N

I (.)GI>-

U k:l- CllI

0 ....foo

"-CD.aE:::J

Z

/,

5

Page 16: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

6

stage, occurs without warning and occurs ov.r a very short

period of tilll •.

The point where unstable crack growth b.gins is a func-

tion of Maximum nominal str.ss. crack geometry. and a prop-

erty known as fracture toughness. This point can be

pradict.d reasonably well with the aid of modern fracture

mechanics analysis. In such an analvsis. the effect of crack

length and applied nominal str.ss are combi~ed and expressed

as stress intensitv. K. The general equation for the calcu-

lation of K is:

(Eq. 1>

f(g) = a paralll.ter that depends upon the sp.c;men andcrack geom.tries

• = maximUM no.i~.l .tress

The stress intensity yalue poss.ss.s the units ksi ~

and .av b. var;.d at any crack l.ngth by yary;ng the appli.d

str.ss. Ther••x;st thr.. basic tyP.s of crack surface

displace.ents known as lIIod.s I, II, and III as shown in

Figur. 3. Th. op.n;ng lIIod., lIIod. I, is the .od. which will

be discuss.d in this work and the str•• s inten.itv valu.

a ••oci.t.d with this mode will her.after be called K%.

Physically, K% d ••crib.s the ••gnitude of the .lastic

.tr.ss fi.ld .round the cr.ck tip and i. a ••••ur. of the

in the vicinitv of the cr.ck tip,

Fracture toughn•• s of the .at.rial is .xpr••••d a. Kxc. the

critical value of K% wher. un.tabl. crack growth occur.

under plan••train condition•• A direct t •• t for d.t.r.i-

T••t. such .s the

Page 17: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

p

p

7

x MODE'

p

y

xMODE II

p

Figure 3 Three MOde Types

MODE II'

Page 18: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

Charpy (ASTM E-23) and Dyna.ic Tear (ASTM E-604) provide for

indirect deter.ination of fracture toughness.

Recognition of the fact that fatigue i. a progre.sive

failure which occurs in three separate stages paved the way

for develop.ent by the aircraft indu.try of a de.ign concept

known a. "fail-safe" de.ign. The philosophy of this concept

is to provide. through a co.bination of initial de.ign and a

regular inspection progra., a procedure which will ensure

that even though cracks develop. they will be detected and

repaired before cata.trophic failure occurs. Thus. the

frequency of inspection Must be such that there is at lea.t

one inspection between the time a crack i. large enough to

be certain of detection and the tim. a catastrophic f.ilure

would occur.

Whether the safe-life or fail-safe design criterion is

used. specifications and acceptance tests must ensure that

the fatigue crack growth rate in the Material of the struc­

ture Is no greater than that assumed by the designer. In

the case 0' safe-life design. a crack growth rate gre.ter

than that as.umed during de.ign would shorten the life of

the .tructure. creating the potential for failure before the

end of the d.sired service life. In the ca.e of fail-safe

de.ign. a crack growth rat. greater than th.t a.sumed in

deter.ining the insp.ction interval might re.ult in

catastrophic collapse before a crack wa. det.cted.

1.' FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH ANALYSIS

The stress intensity factor. K~. is not _ .at.rial

property, but .er.ly a function of the appll.d .tr.s•• geOM­

etry of the sp.ci.en and geo.etry of the crack (~). Th.

stress int.n.ity vari •• during cyclic loading fro. a value

K% ••• at the .axi.u. applied .tress to KZ.'ft at the .iniMu.

applied str •••. Th. differ.nc. b.tween ~he.e i. the .tre••

intensity range, AK~, or

Page 19: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

9

CEq. 2)

for any

crack length. a, on the a-H curve (Figure 4). Thi~ velue is

curve, da/dH. or the

the slope of theplotted on a log-log scale versus

rate of crack growth (Figure 5) •

a-H

et

each corr.sponding value of a.

This plot then takes on the form shown in Figure 6 (5).

This curve is easily divided into three regions.

is characterized by slow fatioue growth. or no growth at

ell. as there exists a value of 6K% below which no crack

growth is seen. Region II is a linear region, which Pari5

(6) has described by the equation:

da/dH = c (6K%)·

where.

(EQ. 3)

c = intercept on the da/dH axis (log 6K%=O. 6K=l) ofa line fitted on the linear portion of the curve.

• = slope of the curve.

This power relationship has been demonstrated bv others

including Barscm ( 3 ) . The importance of this is that the

coefficients become material properties

which describe the fatigue crack growth properties of the

steel.

The curve i. not linear in Region 111. however. This

region ;s characterized by rapid. unstable crack growth

limiting values of the creek growth rete.

which re.ches

represent

final fracture quickly. Regions I and III

The

crack growth rate is elmost zero in Region 1 end almost

infinite in Region 111. There thus exist two asymptotes at

They are called

Page 20: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

ilQ

x...C)zW...J

~

o-<a::::u

NUMBER OF CYCLES, N ......... ....o

Figure 4 Typical Crack Length Vs. Number of Cycles

Page 21: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

to

J:l-t.'Zw aoJ

~

o<C{a::o

AK calculated at 'a'

AK -APx f(a,geometry)

I

NUMBER OF CYCLES, N

//

/'/

dadN - slope of

a- N curve

11

Figure 5 vetennining M< and da/d!'!

Page 22: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

Z'"C....to'"C.wl­e(a:::I:I-

~a:l.?

~

U-ca:uw::;)o

~l.?o..J

IIII.III1III

.1IIIIII

REGION I II

REG ION II

12

REGION III

LOG STRESS -INTENSITY FACTOR,M

Figure 6 RegioDs of Fatigue Crack Growth

Page 23: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

the threshold

asymptote. 6KxHS'

growth.

asymptote. 6KTH'

respectively for

and the

zero and

13

instability

in'finite crack

Page 24: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

CHAPTER 2 - SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIQNS

2,1 SUMMARY

Fatigu. crack-growth rat. tests were conducted on 2&

compact tension .pecimens frOIll the three heat. of st.el

recovered from the Missouri test bri dge. Tests we,.e

conducted at 70° F, 0° Fend -50° F with stre•• intensitv

ranges varying from 22 to 40 ksi Jinches.

Crack growth rate, da/dN, varied sigmoidally with

stress-intensity range fro. approximately 0.9 x 10-' to 0.1

inches per cycle . In all ca.8. crack growth was

• lower at low temperatures than at room temperature.

Material property te.t. including chemical analvses,

ASTM A-370 tension te.ts, ASTM E-23 Charpy impact tests,

ASTM E-604 dynalllic tear test •• and ASHI E-399 plane- strain

fracture toughness te.ts were iliad. for e.ch of the three

he.ts of .t.el, CharFlY and dynallic tear tests were

conducted at temperatyres ranging from -50 DF to +80 o F while

the tension test. and ASTM E-399 fracture toughness te.ts

were conducted at temperature. ranging from -201°F to +aOoF.

Because of the high fracture toughness and limited

thickness <5/1") of the .ateriel. none of the ASTM E-399

fracture toughne •• te.t. sati.fied the conditions for deter­

m;nation of the plane strain fracture toughness. All of the

material property tests indicatad as.antial1y tha sama prop­

ertie. for all three heat. of .te.l.

2.2 CONCLUSIONS

1. Fatigua crack growth rat •• in .t•• l r.cover.d fro.

the "i ••ouri t •• t bridge are in the •••e rang. a5

~ho •• report.d bv l.r50. fDr AST" A-36 .t•• l. Howev­

ar. growth rat. in the t •• t bridge .t.el ••••• to b.

Page 25: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

intensity

15

considerably more sensitive to ~tress

rllng'l, I1KI' than those r~portQd by Bllrsom.

2. There llPP~£lrQd to be no "i~;nificilnt diffQr<"ncp.~, in

either tha milterial properties or the :'ati'jlJe c r •• c k

CJrowth behilvior 01' the three heats of ste'i!l.

3. Dif~erQnces in fatigue behilvior between girdQr~ of

the Missouri test bridge were ~pparently the result

of difference~ in the sharpness of mech~nic~l flaws

rather than material properties.

4. Results from fatigue crack growth tests at varying

temperatures indic~te that fatigue crack growth ratA

is more likely a function of yield strength than of

fracture toughnes~. Thus, it may be that none of

the fracture toughness tests are suitable measures

of susceptibility to fatigue cracking.

S. The ASTM e-399 plane strain fracture toughness

is not a suitable test: for A-36 and similar

carbon bridge steels.

6.The data reduction method which best serves the

fatigue crack growth test ;s th. seven-point PJ}yno­

mial method mentioned in ASTM E-647.

2.3 RECOMMENDATIONS

With the conclusions just mentioned in mind. the

following recom.end.tions for further work .re suggested.

1. Develop an automated system whereby crack growth

rat.s could be recorded systematically and consist­

ently from t.st to t.st. With this. curve fitting

method could be employed and more definite stat.­

menta concerning crack growth rates could be drawn.

2. Additional tests are need.d to determine whether

f.tigue crack initi.tion, like f~tigue-crack-growth

rate is unaffected by fra~tur. toughness. If this

i. in fact the case, then fr.cture toughness influ­

ences only the length of the critical crack at

Page 26: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

16

final fracture and rather large increases in frac­

ture toughness would be required to significantly

increase the fatigue life of • structure.

3. Additional work is needed to clarify the effect. of

reversed .tress cycles on fatigue crack growth. In

cases where the crack closes during the compressive

part of the stress cycle. there is very little if

any change in the stress intensity. K%. during that

part of the cycle. Thus. if stress-intensity range

is the pri.ary factor in fatigue crack growth. the

effects of the negative portion of the stress cycle

.ust b. essentially zero.

Page 27: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

17

CHAPTER 3 - MATERIAL PESCRIPTIO"

3,1 TEST SPECIMENS

The steel used in this investigation was ASTM A-36, the

type commonly used in hot-rolled shapes for bridges and

other steel structures, It was taken from the girders which

supported a highway bridge in southeast Missouri, The

girders were rolled from three different heats of steel. A

diagram of the heat numbers of the beams is shown in Figure

7, Section numbers shown in this diagram represent

locations on the bridge girders which were monitored for

cracks during the full scale testing, Beam pieces tested in

the lab were cut from sections 2, 4 and 6. A tabular repre­

sentation relating the beams and their corresponning heat

numbers is shown in Teble 1, The chemical properties of

each heat are listed in Table 2.

Five different tests. as listed in Table 3. were

performed on .ach of the thr.e heats, Each of the test

specimens was stamped with a five digit identification code

consisting of the section number, the girder number, test

t~pe. and specimen number, The sppcimen locations are shown

in Figures a - 19,

3,2 TENSION TEST

Tension tests were conducted on AST" A-570 (7) speci­

mens of the type shown in Figure 20 for each heat of steel.

Initial room temperature tests made in a 60,000 pound

universal hydraulic testing machine which had been adapted

to produce an analog electrical signal proportional to load,

Strain was .e.sured with an electro-mechanical exten.o.etar

and an auto•• tic stress strain plot was generated. These

te.t. were conducted at a strain rate which produced

Page 28: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

18

West A~t:Irent

Girder1

Girder2

Girder4

lice

lice

pUce

Qlice

- East Pier

- west Pier

!:I /II , ~ ! II

I ; I I a I I I : II ~

, .! ~

: p

_I ( I J ! ~

• • J ~I • I ,I !...L 1+ •IT T s..,I

: I I I- • ~

..

~ c 0 ~(Xl co co co- ~ \D \D ~, , . ·('oj ..-l ....

IFco an 11".N "" l""I

.. I• ..L + ~~ T C;p· L~ ~ ~

co co co co~ 0". v ~- , . .. ·N .... N .......O('l l"'- CD 1lO('.I '" N N

I iu, -L u, + S·• , I ~

-" •

~ c: 0 ...CI) CI) co co~ \D \C ...· . . ·('oj ..-l .... N- co lI'l Lr, CDN "" l""I N, , .• u, l. :1-IT s

I • •,•

P d• • q

I- ~ • ~• • MI I

~K

• , II

Sectioo 7

section 5-

section 4

Section 3

section 1

section 2

Secticn 6

East.~t

Pigure 7 Bridge Layout and Heat Numbers

Page 29: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

19

TABlE 1 HEAT NUMBERS

Swet j on No. liu.i2,1 282,ft84

2.2 351.630

2,3 351,630

2,4 282.484

'+ • 1 282.484

4,2 271.931

4,3 232,434

4.ft 282,ft84

6. 1 282,484

6,2 351,630

6,3 351.630

6,4 232,4&4

TABL E 2 CHEMICAL PROPERTIES P."cent

Hwcpt NR· 351, UO 271.981 282,4&4

Carbon .22 .23 .23

Aluminum <.01 <.01 <.01

Titanium <.01 <.01 <.01

Silicon .04 .0,. .04

Sulfur .020 .030 .019

Mangan.s. .64 .66 ,60

Phosphorus .012 .017 .014

Nick.l .05 .02 .02

Chromiull .06 .05 .04

P'lolybdenull .01 .01 .01

Coppar .11 .03 .03

Vanadiull <.01 <.01 <.01

Boron <.0005 <.0005 <.0005

Page 30: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

TABLE 3 TEST SCHEDULE

TUt Code

A

B

C

E

F

Test Type

Tensile Te.t (A-370)

Ch.rpv (E-23)

Plain-Strain FractureToughn ••• CE-399)

Fatigue Crack GrowthT•• ts CE-647)

Dvnamic TRar CE-604)

20

Page 31: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

I • ,CI. q

J

I I IEIO HI H2 E3 I I

I I C3. C~

..1 I I I I c

cs C6EOO E4 E5 E6 . I I

C7 C8

I 29" JSection 4,4Bottom FlangeHeat 282,484

Figure 8 Specimen Locations, 4,4 Bottom 1

Match Line i

N....

Page 32: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

Match Line 2

Ai

Fl _!1 A3-AS I

t:--

- . ... ...

F5 F6.... ... ...

F7 Fa F9

...tch LineC;"'>

-----,1.l 24"

Section 4.4Bottom FlangeHeat 282,484

Figure 9 Specimen Locations, 4,4 Bottom 2NN

Page 33: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

l,

7M:lteh Line :3

I

tSection 4.4Bottom FlangeHeat 282,484

~. 32"

I

A2 '1I

A4 Dl [)2- IA6 .. ..

/

> -.:

I ...A7

AS81-30 06

A9Match linec;

Figure 10 Spectmen Locations, 4,4 Bottom 3NW

Page 34: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

~

<tHatch 3

D3 D4 DS

... ... ..

~p

... ... y

D7 D8 D9

1 36" lSection 4.4Bot tom Flang eHeat 282.484

Figure 11 Specimen Locations. 4.4 Bottom 4N-

Page 35: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

II

E1 8"2 I E3 r E

I I JI II

II I , I

i

IE6 E7 \ B8 E9 E10

I

J 2~ _

Section 4.1Bottom FlangeHeat 282,484

Figure 12 Specimen Locations. 4,1 BottomNU1

Page 36: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

D3

I I -, P I <4

---....E5 ! E6

D4

F9

1 3J" JSection 2,3Top FlangeHeat 351,680

Figure 13 Specimen Locat.Ions, 2 t 3 Top N0\

Page 37: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

I AiFl B12-23 A2A

IA3

Dl A4

IC\ cr l{3LJ E2A5.&

U I". I A6

C4 IC5

I•D2

I I I 82-10 F3C6 Ctl "..

I..

827-30O~ I ~9 F2 F4

I

j 37" I!·t

Section 2.3Bottom FlangeHeat 351,680

Figure 14 Specimen Locations. 2.3 Bottom N~

Page 38: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

• f2 Y E4iIE!

I IE5 E6 E7 £8

J 19" 1Section 6.2Bottom Flange~ut 351.680

Figure 15 Speci.nen IDcatioos, 6,2 Bottom Nco

Page 39: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

I

I Er EL T E{ l./

I AIO

All

Al2

A13

1 21" 1Section 4.2ABottom FlangeHeat 271.981

Figure 16 Specimen lDcatioos. 4. 2A Belt tom

N~

Page 40: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

B22-29

._.-

F5

D7

F6

F7

DB

- F8

F9

D9

J 2'" 1Section 4.2CTop FlangeHeat 271,981

Figure 17 Specimen I.Dcaticns, 4, 2C Topwo

Page 41: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

IA5

D4 A6I rI _. __Al ________• AS

-----~".- .D5A9-_._---;>

-----. ---f----..--.--.... rD6F3I----

h.__• •

819-21 F4_.- -_. ---- - ._- ----~ --

Hatch Line""/

1 27" JSection 4,2BTop FlangeHeat 271,981

w....Figure 18 Specimen rncat.l..:.ls. 4. 2B Top 1

Page 42: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

27"

F(Match tine

------- ----_._~-

812-14AlIA2' Dl

I [2

----A3 ....

El1--.."I'

-~IA4

D2 I ~•Bl-7 IEJ E4

DJ

B8-11 Fl

..Section 4.2'Top FlangeHeat 271,981

Figure 19 Specimen I.Dcatioos. 4,2B Top 2

wN

Page 43: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

33

Page 44: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

a loading rate of approxi.ately 20 k.i

el.stic region.

34

in the

It wa.

conducted in the servo-controlled electro-hydraulic testing

machine that was used for the d./dN tests. Low temperature

environ.ent was provided with the test apparatus described

in section ~.2 of this report. aecause of space limitations

in the cold box. strain wa. m•••ured with elastic resistance

strain gauge. and again an automatic stress-strain plot was

These tests were conducted under load control at

a loading rate of approximately 30 ksi per minute.

Re.ult. of these tests are shown in Figure 21.

Equation ~ .hown in the figure is from Barson and Rolfe and

shows the sa.e trend as the test result •.

17~.OOO

= (a~, + --------------------- - 27.~) (Eq.~)log (2+l010t)(t+~59)

where.

aYJ = .2X offset yield .trength at the temperatureand load rate indicated by T and t respectively,ksi

ay, = .2X offset yield strength at room temperatureand a load rise ti.e of 100 sec., ksi

T = .peci.en te.Perature. OF

t = load• ec.

3.3 CHARPY TESTS

ri.e ti.e fro••tart of load to fracture •

Charpy te.t. were run in accordance with AST" E-23.

The .peci.en. were cut fro. the flange. of the bridge

girder., twenty-.even fro. each of three heat •• at the

They were .achlned to thelocation••hown in Figure. '-lao

di.en.ton••hown tn Figure 22.

The .peci.en. were te.ted In a Tlntu. Ol.en Pendulum

Machine which wa. fir.t calibrated by te.ting a .et of

Page 45: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

D. Heat No.

o 271,981

70~- o 282,484

0 6 351,680

0- Plot of Eq. 4

60·· \0 6YIELD 0STRENGTH

(ks i)

50~ ~O~

0

-b.

40-~ .~

~

I I t- 175 - 150 - lOa - 50 0 50 75

TEMpOF

Figure 21 Tensile Test ResultswU1

Page 46: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

36

standa~diz.d speci.ens as specified by AST" E-23. Each heat

wa. te.t.d at te.pe~at~~e. yarying fro. -50° to 70°F. These

result. are p~e ••nted in FIgu~e 23.

3.' DyNA"IC TEARtTESTS

Dynamic rear te.t. were run in acco~dance with AST"

E-60~ (,). The specimen. we~e .achlned to the dimensions

shown in Figu~e 2~. They we~e cut fro. the flanges of the

bridge girder. in the location. shown in Fi~ur.s '-13.

Th. specimen. w.~. t •• ted on an "TS Ve~tlcal D~op

Weight rest "achin~. Spocimons wo~e tested at temperatu~es

yarying from -50°F to 7a oF. Tha result. are presented in

Figure 25.

3.5 E-399 TESTS

Twenty-.lx AS'" E-399 (II) specl ••n. were cut fro. the

girder flange. a. indicated In s.ction 3.1. Speci ••n thick­

n.ss wa. the .axl.um thickne •• th.t could b. machined f~om

the girder fl.nge.. The r ••alnlng dl.en.lon. were mad. to

conform with the .peci.en thickne•••nd the AST" E-399 .pec­

ific.tion for comp.ct tension sp.ci.en. (Figure 26). Starter

.lots were .illed .t~alght .cro •• and the .ide. of the SP.c­

imen. were .urface ground.

Sp.ci ••ns were te.ted In. 100 kip s.rvo-cont~olled

el.ctro-hvd~.ulic t.sting .achin.. Howey.r. the 100 kip

lo.d c.ll wa. r.plac.d with a 10 kip load c.ll to incr••••

the pr.ci.lon of load ••••ur•••nt.. C~.ck op.ning was •••• ­

ured with a clip g.ug. fabric.ted to AST" E-399 .pecific.­

tion.. Det.chabl. knife edge. w.~e po.itioned with • jig

and c •••nt.d to the specl ••n. with. cy.nocryl.t. c ••ent.

All sp.ci ••n. exc.pt 44Cl6 w.r.· p~ec~acked at roo.

te.pe~ature whil••peci.en ~~C16 and all .peci ••ns except

sp.ci.en 23Cl w.r. t •• t.d .t te.p.rature. b.low -51·F.

Page 47: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

37

""~r D .~a

U)

t:Q)E-'

fNN

~ Ln ~.r-l\0r...~

~

.+1

N0

'f~0..-40

Page 48: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

o 271,981 (5TrP 00

o 282,484 ~ 6-

80+ c: &.~ 351,6130 0

6-

0 6

60I 0ENERGY

~~ABSORBED[f t-Ib) 40 0o ~O

~r:fl6- 6.

20 + 6.0

O~~--fJ ~~ I I °1 I·50 ·25 0 25 50 75

T EM P of

Figure 23~V~otch Test Results

wQ)

Page 49: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

39

Page 50: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

0271,981 ~

+ 0282,484800

b. 351,680

IH

600

ENERGY I 0

ABSORBED(f t -I b) 400

I

20~a

6

riQ !

1), , I I50 25 0 25 50 75

TEM P of

J:'igure 25 Dynamic 't'ear Test Results•o

Page 51: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

41

2 Holes.250+.002Dia. '"N '"l""I 0

+1o'"

1.25 + .01

Q.75" + •005

Thickne s s!ii~~_lof flange

r.15 min.~lf . r 450----""--------

]Precrack

Figure 26 ASTK £-399 Specimen

Page 52: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

42

The low te~peratur. environment was produced in the cold box

used for the da/dN tests and dascribed in section 4.2.

Test results are shown in Figure 27 and Table 4. None

of the tests setis~ied all o~ the condition. for a valid Kxc

test. In general, require.ents for linear ela.tic behavior

(i.e. P••• /P. < 1.1) was •• tisfied only by those specimens

tested at te.perature. below -IODoF. Only speci.ens 44C3,

44C6 and 44C16 te.ted at teNperatures of -1&6°,

respectively, .atlsfied the conditions for plain

strain i.e., B>2.5(KG/.~.).

Although these two conditions could apparantly be

satisfied by tasting at suf~iciently law t ••peratures it was

virtually Impassible to simultaneously satisfy both these

requirements and the rQqu;re.ent that the maximum .trass

intensity during tha last 2.5 percent of precracking be Ie ••

than .6 <.v. pracracklng/.v. test) KG. Lowering the testing

temperature reduced the value of KG and increased the yiald

.trength at the testing temperature.

the permissible .aximu. stress intensity during the la.t 2.5

percent of precracking.

Although no formal .et of crack growth threshold tests

was conducted, observations during precracking

that the crack

approximately 10

growth threshold

ksiJTn. However fro. a

temperature was

practical .tand-

point it wa. very difficult to precrack at roam temperature

with .anual

ksiJr;. With

:ontrol and stress intensity less than 14

equipment for program.ed automatic continuous

load shedding, precracking stress intensity could be reduced

to approxi.ately 12 ksiJTn., but reducing the stress inten­

sity below that level would ~apldly incre•• e the required

tl •• beyond practical ll.its. Even 12 ksiJTn. is signif­

icantly higher than the 9 ksiJTn. which would b. the ••xi.u.

allowable for sp.ci ••ns t •• ted at a t.mperature of -200°F

wi~h a Ka valu. of 30 k.IJTn.

In order to rais. the allowable .tr••• Intensity during

precracking, specl ••n 44C1' w.s precracked at a t ••p.ratur.

Page 53: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

5,-

:1

Heat No

o 271,981'

RSC

6 o 282,484

6. 351,680

0

2 ~.O~6.

8 00 0 0

1+ OO~ 0 ~6

I

. 200

I

-100,o

TEMP OF

100

..tAl

Figure 27 ASTH £-399 Results

Page 54: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

TABLE 4 - ASTM E-399 TEST RESULTS ..... ...SPEC. S W PU- MAX TEST • .. ...

a Po MAX KO R • • .. ..

in. in. CRACK Kf TEMP. in. Be .. N .. \0kips P ksi . . . .

N .... .. ....TEMP. ksi deq F kips vrii'. . . . .deq P ..,-m. CD a'I r-- a'I

23C1 0.625 1.249 70 41.2 70 0.853 1.67 2.25 47.11 4.27 p F F F

23C2 0.625 1.254 70 33.0 -58 0.6951 2.30 3.28 37.90 2.07 T F F F

23C4 0.622 1.255 71 19.3 -195 0.7485 2.73 2.73 52.73 1.47 T T F F

23C5 0.623 1.202 70 15.0 -103 0.6422 2.81 2.81 44.33 1.53 T T T F

23C6 0.623 1.258 70 18.5 -135 0.7372 2.62 2.62 48.51 1.58 T T F F

23C7 0.623 1.256 69 14.3 -193 0.6625 2.70 2.70 40.68 1.03 F T F F

23C8 0.623 1.253 73 17.42 -148 0.7311 2.85 2.98 52.37 1. 72 T T F F

23C9 0.626 1.257 70 23.0 -112 0.6714 3.10 4.47 47.57 2.11 F F F F

42C2 0.610 1.253 70 30.0 -58 0.6563 3.16 '3.67 48.00 2.06 F F F F

42C3 0.609 1.257 78 17.2 -190 0.7207 1.97 1.97 35.37 1.04 T T F F

nC4 0.608 1.252 74 17.9 -160 0.7122 2.26 2.26 40.)6 1. 28 T T F F

42C5 0.610 1.254 11 36.2 -76 0.1365 2.50 3.00 47.59 2.25 T F F F

42C6 0.608 1.261 67 26.3 -166 0.6883 3.45 3.45 56.61 1.68 T T F F

nC1 0.606 1.255 15 20.1 -103 0.1691 2.83 3.18 59.91 2.10 T F T F

42C8 0.609 1.248 16 15.1 -130 0.6812 2.50 2.50 41.19 1.29 T T F F

42C10 0.592 1.260 11 33.2 -58 0.7008 2.91 3.41 50.85 2.28 T F F F

44C1 0.625 1.252 67 28.5 -58 0.6890 2.81 3.14 45.71 2.11 T F F F

44C2 0.626 1.253 70 32.8 -148 0.7111 2.97 2.97 51.23 1. 68 T T F F~

~

Page 55: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

TABLE 4 tContinued)

44C3 0.623 1.252 71 18.1 -186 0.7247 1.90 1.90 34.34 0.98 T T F T

44C4 0.625 1.251 71 30.9 -112 0.6880 3.19 3.19 51.85 1. 84 F T F F

44C5 0.622 1.253 72 19.5 -197 0.7505 1.98 1.98 38.67 1.11 T T F F

44C6 0.623 1.253 72 18.6 -189 0.7358 1.88 1. 88 35.02 1.00 T T F T

44C7 0.622 1.253 73 11.3 -101 0.7421 2.62 2.62 49.86 1.91 T T T F

44CI 0.622 1.256 71 16 .8 -177 0.6674 2.95 2.95 45.17 1.18 F T F F

44C9 0.623 1.253 70 17.9 -189 0.7220 2.11 2.11 37.73 1.06 T T F F

44C16 0.601 1.199 -197 20.7 -207 0.6740 1.52 1.52 27.37 0.85 T T F T

.. T indicates specification is satisfied, and F indicates it is not satisfied.. Section 8.2.~ of ASTM E-399 defines the shape of the crack front for a valid test .

-- Section 9.1.2 of ASTM 2-399 requires that Pm xl PQ ~ 1.1-** Section 7.4.4 of ASTM E-399 require that Kf 8uring last 2.5'2precrack~O.6<~yl/~y2)KQ

**** Section 9.1. 6 of ASTM E- 399 requires that a & B ~ 2.5 <KQ/cry)

..,.U'I

Page 56: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

46

of -193°F. This raised the MaxiMuM .llowable stress inten­

sity during precracking to approxi.ately 13.5 ksiJTn.

However, the low teMPerature which approxi •• tely doubled the

yield stress also n.arlv doubled the crack growth threshold

level and the .iniMuM precrack stress

was 20 ksi!Tft.

Thus, it wa. concluded that with •••XiMUM thickness of

0.6 inches it is not possible to conduct a valid Kzc test on

this .aterial at any te.perature. Observations during

precracking of the.e speci.ens also sUQg.st that

fatigue-crack growth is .uch more closely associated with

yield strength than it i. with fracture toughness. The plot

of R•• shown in Figure 27 reveals no significant difference

betwe.n the.e three heats of steel.

Page 57: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

CHAPTER 4.- FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH TESTS

The preliMinary version of ASY" E-647 used for this

work do •• not in .11 e •••• comply with the final v.rsion.

which was published .ubs.qu.nt to th.s. t.sts.

4.1 SPECIMEN DESIGN ANp PREPARATION

Crack growth t.sts w.r. conducted using Compact T.nsion

eCT), Wedge-Op.n-loading (WOl) sp.cim.ns. Flang.s w.r.

fl.m. cut from the web. and rectangular blocks were cut from

th.m with a bandsew. In Figures 9 - 18 the cutting petterns

.nd specimen orientation ar. shown for each flange eventual­

ly used. No specimen was cut so as to be within 2" of any

he.t .ff.ct.d zone such e. e fleme cut or w.ld. This wa. to

.nsur. that the micro-structure. of all specimens were

essentially unalt.r.d. Th.se blocks were then machined and

ground to the di.ensions shown in Figure 23. Care wes taken

to ensure that the grinding process did not significantly

reduce the thickne.s of the speci.ens, but that it did leave

a ••ooth, well poli.hed surface. the grinding proce.s wa.

in the direction perpendicular to the line of crack growth

to aid the .icro.copic viewing of the crack.

The notch opening was eut perpendicular to the direc­

tion in which the .teel wa. rolled during fabrication. This

wa. done to most clo.ely appro_i.ate the orientation of a

crack which could for. in a flange and propagate perpendicu­

larly to the axial stress field. The speci.en. were sprayed

with. Krylon lacquer to prevent corrosion before te.ting.

4.2 TEST EOUIPMENT

Page 58: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

2 Holes.750 +.002Dja.

--~- . --=----.....-.,

48

'"-o.+1oao

Thic.knes!>of flange

G)I

2.25:t .015 J-

Prec.rack

F1lun 211 .,dlI SpeCDen Deaip

Page 59: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

49

electrohyd~aulic servocontrolled test machine was used to

load the fatigue crack growth specimens. Loading W~5

applied to the specimen through clevises designRd according

to ASTM E-647. Figure 29. The clevis.s were made of AISI

4340 st.el heat treat.d to a rockwell hardn.ss of C-40. Tho

position of the crack was measur.d with two Gaertner travol­

ing microscope. mounted on miCrometer slide •• Figure 30.

To maintain a fixed low tempereture a plexigl.ss box

was constructed which would fit around the specimen and

clevi.es. Figures 31 and 32. The specimen was cooled by

blowing a temperature regulated gas, primarily nitrogen,

through the box.

The gas was blown through 1 1/2" diameter copper piping

which was installed with a throttle valve that forced a

certain portion of the gas through a dewar containing liquid

nitrogen. This kept the gas within a few degre.s of the

proper temperature. To fin. tune the system to the exact

temperature. a ••all heating element made of nichrome wire

was inst.lled in the flow and connected to a

thermo-controll.r. A ther.ocoupl. relay.d the temp.rature

of the gas to th_ thermo-controller. which cycled the he.t­

ing ele.ent on and off •• n.eded. A s.cond thermocouple was

inserted in a hole in the .pecim.n to ••••ur. the temper­

ature of the sp.ci ••n.

At the beginning of the cooli~g process the system wa.

circulating air. but as the liquid nitrogen boil.d off. the

t.st environment b.came primarily nitrogen. Every effort

w•••ade to k ••p the system airtight. as any moisture enter­

ina the svste. condens.d causing ic. to collect in the

piping.

,,] TEST PRDCEDURES

Since the objectiYe of this .xperi.ent wa. to compare

the fatigue cr.ck growth rete. of the •• terial in the thr ••

h.at. of .t.el. the t •• ts were •• t UP with the ide. th.t .11

Page 60: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...
Page 61: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...
Page 62: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...
Page 63: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...
Page 64: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...
Page 65: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...
Page 66: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...
Page 67: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

57

4,' DATA REDUCTION METHODS

The value. relating the crack tip growth rat ••• da/dH.

and the stress intensity rang., ~Kr, Must ~irst be derived

fro'" raw a vs,

fatigue craCk growth tests. AST" E-647 suggest. two method.

of reducing the data, the ••cant method and the s.ven point

polynomial .ethod, For this work, both method. were employed

and cOIlPared,

For both lIethods, the alternating .tre.. intensity

value AK% was calculated using Equation 6 (S),

where,

~IC% = ~p fea/w)CEq. 6)

fCa/w) = (O,2960Ca/w) - l,aSSCa/w)· + 6,557Ca/w)~-10,17Ca/w)· + 6,satCa/w)·) x 100 Cref. 3)

The fifth order polynomial in Equation 6, found in aarSOM

and Rolf., ;s a function of speci.en geo.etry,

Other COMPliance functions hav. been derived for this

specimen geo.etry and can be found in reference. 6, 11 and

lZ. Each arrive. at approximately the Sa•• value of ~K%.

The secant .ethod i. based on the •••u.ption that the

data point. lie pr.cisely on the .-N curve. The crack

growth rate i. derived using Equation 7, which yields the

slope of a straight lin•. connecting two con.ecutive point.,

If the data point. on the a-N curve are nUMbered a.,aa, , .• ,

aft' then the value of 'a' is equal to Ca, + a'.I)/Z t. u.ed

to calculate ~K%.

Page 68: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

da/dN = ----------- ( Eq. 7)

Sa.ple calculations are shown In Table 5.

There I. a certain a.ount of .catter that exists in the

rew data which the secant .ethod a.pllfie.. The r.sulting

plot doe. not display the crack growth curve with .uch clar­

ity. The .ethod do.s produco one da/dH vs. 6K, data point

for evory a-N data point after the fir.t. Thus. for a short

te.t. this .ethod would bo de.irablo.

The polyno.lal method utilizes a .econd order polvno.i­

al equation to dorlve the relationship for da/dH vs. 6K%.

The .ethod u.e••even con.ecutlve data points to approxi.ate

the a-N curve with a polynomial. thus effectively ••oothlng

the .catter that exi.t. in the raw data. The original a-M

data are fitted to a curve as shown in Figure 34. The value

of a used in calculating 6K% i. arrived at using Equation 8.

( Eq. a)

where.

The value. b.. b •• and b. or. tho rogr••• lon para.otor.

d.tor.lned by the l.ast .quare••ethod over the range a,_" ~

a ~ 0'.... The value a Is the fl tted valu. of crack longth

at M,. T~. para.eter. C. = 1/2(",_" + N,.") and C. =1/2(N, ... - N,_") are u.ed to scale the Input data. thus

avoiding nu.erical dlfflcultie. in deter.inlng the

regre •• ion para.eter •• The rate of crackgrowth at N, I.

obtained fro. the derivative of Equation 7. a. shown In

Equat! on ••

Page 69: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

a

a -----i-n

Figure 34 Seven Point Polynomial Method

f(x)

S9

Page 70: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

60

TULE 5 SECANT I1ETHOD SAI1PLE CALCULATIONS

.. II a. d d./dN1. 00 100.000

.10 100.000 1.0h:1O-·1. 10 200.000

.05 ~o.ooo 1.25xlo-·1. 15 240,000

.05 30,000 1.67K10-·1. 20 270,000

.05 15,000 3.33xI0-·1.25 215.000

.10 20,000 5.00xlO-·1. 35 305.000

CEq. 9)

The v.lue of n used w.s 3. th.t is. 7 successive data points

were uti!tzed.

Th. d.t••r. reduc.d by .oving .Iong the a-H curv.

until th.re are only six point. left in the curve. D.t.

r.duction ends.t this point. thus d./dN yalues .r. not

cOMput.d for six of the points in the curye. three .t the

b.ginning. three .t the end.

The polyno.i.l w.s found to be far superior to the

s.c.nt •• thod bec.use it produced results which M.ke the a-H

curve .ppe.r to h.ve ••onotonic.lly incr•• sing first d.riv-

.tiye.

r.duc. the d.t. for this work. Figures 35 .nd 36 show the

cOMP,rison b.tw••n the two ••thods using H•• t 271,'11 .t

-50°F.

Page 71: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

61

DELT A K, (M Pa J"rii )

-410

~~ (in/cycle)

30

••

o

40 5060

(mm/cvcte] 103

o 20 30 4 80

DEL T A K.t ksi ,/ffi)

Figure 35 Reduced Data for Heat 271.981 at -50°FUsing the Scc&nt ~ethod

Page 72: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

62

DELTA K,(MPav'm)

-410 -

20I

~~ (in/cycle) (rnm/cycle) -3'-10

165_ 4

/ -104

,•

106_,••• '-105

o 30 ab 50 60

DEL T A K,( ksi \/Iii)

oFigure 36 Reduced Data for Heat 271,981 at -50 r

U.1Dg the polynomial Method

Page 73: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

63

CHAPTER 5 - RESULTS AND PISCUSSION

Twenty-eight fatiguo crack growth test. were conducted.

The ra~ data were taken as previously described and reducod

to a moro usable form as da/dH vs. 6K%. Those results wore

thon plotted on a

Figuros 37-45. Th.

in tabular form.

log-log scalo and displayed as shown in

5.1 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

It can be obsorved that the data

37-45 aro of tho sigmoidal It is

plainly s.en that at low values of 4K% the curve ris •• sh.r­

ply with increasing 4K%. It is also apparert that at

certain values of 4Kx. thore is no crack growth. This is

the threshold value of 6K%. which yaried b.twe.n 22 and 24

ksi~. Beyond this tho cury. reaches a value of 6K% at

which tho da/dN vs. 4Kx relationship is linoar on a log-log

scal.. Thi. range was genorally botweon 2& and 31 ksi 1Tft.The third region. where rapid unstable growth

Thi. i. due in part to

i. not appar.nt from tho

the f.ct that the first two

loads were .hed w.ll b.for. the crack growth r.ached region

III. Only tho final constant load period wa. allowod to

entor the third region. However. no data could b. tak.n

during this .tage, because the .achine could not .aint.in

the full load cycle. Thus. it w.s impos.ible to determ;no

the value of the in.tability asymptot.. At 70°F. tho speci­

.en failed by ductile te.ring. which could be observ.d but

not ••••ur.d. At both -50°F .nd OOF, tho .p.ci ••n fail.d by

fr.cture.

A line.r r.gr.s.ion mod.l w.. ..t up to obtain •

l.a.t-.quare. fit of tho lin •• r portion of tho curv ••• Sinc.

Page 74: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

64

DE l TA K,(MPa./ffi)

-410

~~ (in/cycle)

30 40 50 60

(mmzcvcte) 103

••••

HEAT 282,484o

TEMP-50 F

o 20 30 4 80

DEL T A K.( ksi v'iil)

oFigure 37 da/cUl v. AItx for Heat 282,484 at -50 F

Page 75: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

65

DE l TA K,(MPa.m;)

30I

40 50 60I I I

-410 -

~~ (in/cycle)

//-Cboo•o

(mm/cYcle) ..... 103

o

HEAT 282,484 ..... 165

TEMP 0°,

804b 50 60301Ci7-1- ,...--__---r__~-..,.___r--.,__..--.I

10

DEL T.A K. ( ks i J'ffi)

. 0Figurp 38 da/dN V8. ~l for Heat 282,484 at 0 F

Page 76: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

66

DE L-TA K,(MPaJm)

-410 -

30I

40 50 60I , f 8p 100,

~~ (in/cycle)

[rnrn/cvct e)~103

HEAT 282,484 ~1C)5

TiM P 70°F

o 20 30 4b 50 60 80

DELT.A K,(ksi Jin}

Figure 39 da/dN vs. AKt for Heat 282,484 at lOoF

Page 77: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

67

DELTA K.(MPaJm)

20I

30I

40 50 60 80 100I I I I I

-410 -

~~ (in/cycle) (mrn/cvcl e) __ 103

HEAT 351.680 -105

TEMP-50~

804b 50 SO30201(?4-------r---~--.,_-.___,--._-......

10

DELTA K,(ksi Jiil)

Figure 40 daldN va. ~Kt for Beat 351,680 at -50oF

Page 78: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

68

DELT A K, (M Pa ./iii)

-410 -

20I

~~ (in/cycle)

30I

40 5060I I I

(mm/cycle) f-103

•••••

./'.••••e-o..

o

0.o

••HEAT 351,680

TEMP 0° F

20 3b 4b 50 60 80

DELTA K,(ksiJrn)

oFiguTe 41 da/dN ve. AK1

fOT Heat 3S1.680 at 0 F

Page 79: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

69

DE LTA K,{MPaJiTl)

20I

30 40 5060 80 100

-410

~~ (in/cycle) (mrn/cvcte) 103

HEAT 351,680 1()5

TEMP 70°,

80430201(?-+------,.-----,---r--~__,r__-_._-......

10

DEL T A K,(ksi "'in)

Figure 42 da/dN VB. ~KI for Heat ·351,680 at 70°,

Page 80: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

70

DELTA K.(MPaJm)

-410 -

30I

40 5060I I r

~N (in/cycle)

,•,

••

(mm/cycle) ~163

o 20

••

30

HEAT 271,981o

TEMP-50 F

4b 50 60

DELT A K. (ksi \/in)

oFigure 43 da/dN va. 6~ fot' Heat 271,981 at -50 F

Page 81: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

71

DELTA K.(M Pa JiTi)

-410 -

30I

~~ (in/cycle) (mm/c ycle) ..... 103

o

I••

I•, HEAT 271,981

TEMP _OOF

o 20 4b 50 60 80

DELTA K.{ksi,,!ffi)

oFigure 44 da/dN VB. h~I fOT Heat 271,981 at 0 F

Page 82: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

72

DE LTA K,(MPaJiTi)

-410

-510

20I

~~ (in/cycle)

30

•1.••••,

40 50 60

[mrn/cvc le l 103

HEAT 271,981

TEMP 70°,

o 20 30 4 50 60 80

oE ~T A K.( ksi v'ffi)

Figure 4S da/dN V8. AKI for Heat 271.981 at 70°F

Page 83: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

somewhat between tests,

73

the

cu,.ves we,.e evaluated between the AKx value. which en com-

passed the linea,. po,.tion for each of the nine graphs.

this, an equation of the following form was det.rmined.

From

where,

da/dN = cCAKx)- CEq. 10)

c = intercept on th~ da/dN ax;. Clog AKx = 0, AKx = 1)of a line fittod on the lin.ar portion of thecurve.

- = .lope of the line

Th •• e ,.e.ult. ar. shown in Table 6.

S.Z EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE

It 1S gene,.allv accept.d fractur. mechanic. theory that

the critical str••• inten.ity value

rial's r.sistance to fractur., and the higher the value, the

tougher the materi.l. !n addition. as temperature

decre••es, the toughn••• also d.cr.8 •••. Charpy and Dvnamic

T.ar t.sts conduct.d for this work v.rifv this,

Figures 23 and 25.

Thi. would l •• d on. to beli.v. that as

d.cr •••• s .nd toughn.ss al~o dec,.e.s.s, that the crack

growth rat. would inc,..asing. Howev.r, the

r.sults ,f thes.

that the crack growth rat. actual Iv decrea5••• s temp.,.atur.

decr.as.5.

By plotting the .quations, .5 h•• b •• n don. tn Figures

it can b••••~ that both the v.lu. of the c"ack

growth r.t., da/dM, and the slope of the lin., or r.t. of

Page 84: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

74

TABLE 6 LIHEAR REDUCTION RESUL TS

H.!tt..i Temp.rdur. fgultj on

282,tt8tt -50'F da/dH = 3.16 10- 1 1 AKr'·11

0° F da/dH = ft.ft5 10- 12 AK r 4 • ZZ

70' F da/dH = 5.03 10- 1 3 AK r 4 . • •

351,680 -50'F da/dH = 1. 62 10- 10 AK r:l • 1 1

0° F da/dH = 7. 94 10- 1 2 AK r' . , :I

70 0 F da/dH = 3.9a 10- 1 2 AKJ:4.ZI

271,981 -50°F da/dH = 3.9a 10- 1 1 AKJ:3.4'

OOF da/dH = 1. 7" 10- 1 2 AK:r4.47

70°F da/dH = 3.98 10-1:2 AK:r 4 • • •

Page 85: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

75

-":. 1 _ ,

DE LTA K,(MPaJm)

20 30 40 50 60I

100

-410

~~ (in/cycle) [mrn/c vef e] 163

8050 60430201Cj1....... --.- --.-__,--_~___.,--~----I

10

DEL T A K. ( ks i Viii)

Figure 46, Results for Heat 282,484

Page 86: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

76

DE LTA K,(MPaJrn)

20I

30 40I

-410

~~ (in/cycle)

700

00 (rnm/cvc le) 103

_500

8040 50 603020u:?-+------,.---~r_-__,_-._-.--__,_-~

10

DEL T A K.tksi v'in)

Figure 47 Results for Heat 351,680

Page 87: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

77

DELTA K.(MPaJm)

20I

30 40 50 60 80 100, I

-410

~~ (in/cycle) [rnm/cvc l e] 103

8030107-+- ,..- -r--_-,-_-,-_-r-_---r_~

10

DEL T A K.(ksi v'iO)

Filure 48 Results for Ueat 271,981

Page 88: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

is true fo,. .11 thr •• h•• ts.

71

Thus. whi 1.

failur•• ight occur.t • low.r .tr•• s int.nsity (1C~c:) a.

t ••p.ratur. d.c,. •••••• the ti •• to failu,.. i5 .ignificantly

long.,..

Thi. SUgg••ts that c,..ck growth r.t. i. not r.lated to

toughn •••• Chrok (13) .tat•• th.t cr.ek growth rate is

inste.d ,.elated to the yi.ld st,..ngth of the mat.rial. a.

indic.ted bv hi ••tat ••ent.

"Irwin (14) h•• shown that the .iz. of the localizedpla.tic zone .t the tip of a crack i. d;r.ctlv depend­ent upon the applied .tre.s int.nsitv-yield st,.ength,.atio quantity sClu.,..d. (KX/cry,,)2. In addition, it hasb••n shown (h.r.) and el ••where that the fatigue crackg,.owth rat. for a given m.t.ri.l incre.s.s a. thestress intensitv factor incr •• s.s (15.16.17,11>. Th.re­for •• it is apparant that the fatigue cr.ck growth rat.incr.as•••• the pla.tic zone size increas•• , .ugg.st­ing that the ••chanis•• of fatigue crack beh.vio,. are,..l.t.d to crack tip pl.sticit~ consid.,..tions.-

Ten.ile t.st. eonducted on the bridge .peci ••ns 'ndi­

c.t. that yi.ld strength does in fact Inc,. •••• with d.cr ••• -

ing temper.tu,..s.

aar.om & Rolfe.

This concurs with .quations shown by

wh.re,

17ft,OeO.yJ= C.v • + -------------------- - 27.4)log (2+101·~)(T+459)

CEq. 11 >

= O.2X offs.t yi.ld strength .t the t ••paraturaand load rat. indicat.d by T and tr.spectiv.ly, .si

= O.2~ offs.t yi.ld st,..ngth at roo. t.MP.ratur.and a load ri •• ti •• of 100 ••e., ksi

T = .p.ct ••n t ••p.ratur •• eF

t = load ri •• ti •• fro••tart of load to fractur ••••c.

Thu. crack growth rat. app.ars to b. ~ function 01 yield

str.ngth .n~ pla.tic zone rath.r than fractur. toughn ••••

Page 89: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

7'

5.3 EFFECTS OF MATERIAL PROPERTIES

whether differences in crack growth rates in these three

heats of steel could be attributed to differences in other

material properties.

Comparing the results shown in Table 5 and plotted in

Figures 49-51, it appears that each heat exhibited similar

crack growth properties at each temperature. Thus, it

significant inappears that material differences were not

determining crack growth rates.

The chemical differences in the three heat. are minor.

From Table 2, the percentage of carbon content in heats

232,484 and 271, 981 is identical: .23X • Heat 351,680'.

carbon content is .lightly lower: .22". This hardly seems

significant, and there appear to be no other differences.

Toughness properties as determined by the Charpy tests and

Dynamic Tear tests also show no apparent differences.

5.4 EFFECT OF LOAD SHEDDING

During the course of each test.

load wa. reduced to comply with A51" E-647 and to prevent

the stress inten.ity from becoming so l.rge that it caused

excessive yielding at the crack tip. Loads were shed twice

per test. This proved .ignificant in analyzing tha re.ults.

As the crack grows, K%••• increases. which in turn

incr.ases the plastic zone in front of the crack. The slz.

of the plastic zone for plane .tre ,s can be determined by

Equation 12.

ICEq. 12)

Page 90: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

80

DELTA K.(MPa.Jm)

20 30 40 50 60 80 100I

-410

~~ (in/cycle)

282,484

(mm/cvcle l 103351,680

271,981

8043020olil-+--------,r-----,----,r-----r-..,...---,.----

DELT A K, (ksi .,rrn)

Figure 49. Results at -5oPF

Page 91: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

81

DELTA K.(MPaJm)

20I

30 40 50 60 80 100,

-410 282,484

~~ (in/cycle) (mrn/cvcte) 103

271 ,981

8043020107

-t- ---...----r-.......,..--r----,--10

DEL T A K.(ksi "'in)

Figure 50. Results at OaF

Page 92: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

82

DELTA K,(MPaJm)

20 30 40 50 60 80 100I

-410

~N (in/cycle) (rnm/cvcte] 103

1C?-+-----....----r-----t--"""T"-.,----,--~o 20 30 4 50 60 80

DELT A K,(ksi.Jm}

Figure 51. Results at lOaF

Page 93: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

83

In test 44E05, Kz ••• at the point of load shedding was 39

ksi JTn. the yield strength was 37 ksi.and the plastic zone,

rv. was .18". After load shedding. Kx••• was 26 ksi !Tn. and

the plastic zone SlZ8 should have been .08". At this point

large plastic strains around the crack tip just before load

shedding probably increased the yield strength in the ples­

tic zone through strain hardening. This in turn reduced the

crack growth rat. until the outer fringe of the new plastic

zone had propagated to the fringe of the plastic zone

produced just before load shedding. This did not occur until

the crack had grown .08", K••• equalled 28.5 ksi ~. and ry

equalled .10".

This indicates that crack growth curves may be

distorted in the region below 28 ksi JTn and the actual

crack growth threshold may be lower than the 21 or 22 ksl

/Tn indicated. It was also observed during precracking of

the E-399 specimens that the threshold might actually be as

low as 10 or 12ksi JTn at room temperature.

Page 94: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

REFERENCES

1. "issou~i Coop.~atiy. Highway Research P~og~... FinalRepo~t, "Fatigue Test of a Th~ ••-Span Composit. Highway8~idg.". UnlYe~sity of "i ••ou~i-Colu.bia, 1973.

2. Hoeppne~. D.W. and K~upp. W.E .• "P~.diction of Compon.ntLife by Application of Fatigue C~ack G~owth Knowl.dg.",Engin.ering Fractyr. Mechanici • Vol. 6. 1974. pp. 47-70.

3. Ba~som and Rolfe. E~actYr' and Fatiqye Cont~ol jn St~uc­tyr's • P~.ntice Hall. Inc .• 1977.

4. Pook. L.P •• Frost. H.E .• Ma~ch. K.J. Metll fatjgye. Cl&~­

.ndon Pr ••s. Oxfo~c!. 197ft.

5. Campbell. J.E •• "Fatigue of High-St~e"gth Alloys at LowT.mp.~atur. - A Review", E,tj~U' ,nd Fraetyr. Touahnes,­C~voa.nie Bthlyior • ASTM SPT 56.

6. Pari., P. and Erodogan. E.• "A C~itieal Anll-'Iis of C~ack

P~opagation Laws". Journal of '.'ie EDgjn •• rjna. Trlns­act; ons of the ASME, Vol. 85, 1963, pp. 528-534.

7. ASTM A370-77. "".chanlcal Te.ting of St •• l P~oducts".Part 10. AST" Standards. 1979, pp. 28-83.

8. ASTM E-23. "Hotched Bar Impact Testing of M.tallie Mlte­rial.", Part 10, AST" Standards, 1979, pp. 237-253.

9. ASTM E-60~. "Dyna.ic T,a~ Energy of M,tallie Mlterials".Part 10. ASTM Standards. 1979. pp. 6~5-653.

10. AST" E-399, "Plane-Strain Fracture Toughn.ss of Met.llieMaterials". Part 10. ~STM Standards, 1979. PP. 5~0-5'1.

11. AST" E-6~7-78T, "Con.tant-Load-Amplitude Fatigu. CrickGrowth Rat •• Abov. 10-· m/eyele". Part 10. ASTM Standards.1979. PP. 703-721.

lZ. We ••el. E.T •• "Stat. of the Art of the WOL Sp.ci.en forKxc Fractu~e Toughness 'I.tlng". Englneerjng Fr,etureM,ch,nic, • Vol. I, 1968, pp. 77-103.

13. Clark, W.G.. J~ .• Trout, H.E.. Jr.. "Influenc. ofTemperatur. and S.ction Size on Fatigu. Crack Growth B.hay­ior in Hi-"o-V Alloy St.el". Fractyre ",ehlnjcs.

WPla.tic Zone Hear a Crack and Fracture7th S,ve.gre Ordinanc. Mat,r. R.s. Cont.

1 5. E. T. We••• 1 , W• G• CIe " k and W. K • Wi 1 • 0 n. " Eng in•• r i n 9Method. for the D,.ign and Selection of "aterial. AgainstFrlctur., U.S. Ar.y Tank-AutOMotive Center Rep .• ContractHo. DA-3D-06'-AMC-602(T), ~~ ~o. 801005. (1966).

16. A.J. Brothers .nd S. YukawI,"Fatigue Crack Propag.tionin Low-Alloy Heat-Tre.t.d Steel,W J. '" Enanq. , ASME PiperHo. 66-M.t-ZClt66).

17. C.M. Car.an Ind J.M. K.tlin, wLow Cycle F.tigue CrackProp.g.tion Chlract,~i.tic. of High-Strength St,.ls". J. lalEngnq. , AS"E Pap.r Ho. 6'-Met-3 (1966).

WThe Fracture Mech.nics App~oach to1. tb '.Pallore ArMY ".tIC' Bu. Cpn.

18. P.C. P.ri ••F«I t i g u e W • ...p.,&c..l0'"c....' _ ....&.I..u..__ILII...LllL:IU-........a.Jr.:JII.K--JiJJl..LIu.;._-llULiiL&._~l£.U....._(1"3).

Page 95: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

APPENDIX

as

Page 96: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

FAT.GY~CRACK GMU.TH TEIT UAT.

S':'~C:a"~N hO. .at; ,j

.,.0.5•• INCHES _~.009 .NCtCS

TCIIPC'UlrURC 0 aeGRHI ,.

II. QII lUQIII 8li se 6 II

0.03.5 ~OOO. e.723 3•••g0 6.00 0.902 la200.O.lUI. 1000. ••922 3••321 6.00 0.899 19200.0.0119 • 000. ••259 2 ••1t4 • 4.30 0.914 2.J200.0.0139 • 000. &.1.2 2•••7• ".30 0.923 27200.0.0013 3000. 0.'125 25.0,e 4.30 0.925 ;'0200•0.0711 .OGGO. .J.52.· 26.320 ... 30 0 ••90 70200.0.0016 17.50. :'.;'02 21.a52 4.30 1.07. aaG50.0.050.1 7:100. 0.2.3 28.426 ••30 1.110 95550 •0.0.92 7000. 7.9a3 a9.7.1 4.a. 1.1•• 102550.0.G260 3i/:70. a.3GO 30••a6 ••28 1.192 105NO •0.G26G 300G. ct.196 31.00. ... aa 1.217 10aeao.0.G280 3000. 11....2 31 ••50 4.av l.a.3 llillao.0.oa75 ~OGG. 10.215 32.64' •• 29 1.2'2 u._o•0.G307 ,JOoo. 11.163 33.S.J5 ••2. 1.30.1 11 7BilO •0.036. 3000. 1~.tl92 3••131 ..2. 1.337 la"ct2o.0.0368 30.. 0. 1.;1:.0.5 36 •••n ••oJl 1 •.391 la.J82G •0.0431 30GO. 6 ••35 36.117 ..~I 1••00 12c._0.0.OlH9 30110. ..0•• oJl • .l3'1 ..31 1•• 18 12.a20.0.0032 22000. 1.113 22.'.5 2. itO I •• 'a lSI_a.0.0.5. 33000. 0.077 23.6"0 2 ••'1 I.SI. Ic. ••ao.0.010. 2••0G. 0.065 2••0.~ 2.50 1. saC. 211l!'20.0.04.0 100000. 1.110•• 26•• 39 2.50 1.6116 311620.0.0.52 30000. 3 • .1•• 270(.43 2.50 1.056 ~.Iwo.0.0500 12020. •• a75 29.'57 2.50 1.10»5 ;a5;a640.0.or7S 13000. 7.24. ;n .... 2.50 1.1... ~Oo"'h0.0513 5000. 7.to67 .12 ..... 2 •• It I.ItOf, 3716.0.0.056. .250. 1.9.0 ;a•••Co2 2.50 1.8.2 37:»"0.0.lIlU9 10000. .. ••SS 31.5'13 2.00 1.9iiiO HS"U.o.oa.o 2000. a.13. 32.'07 2.00 1•••2 ;,a7..0.0.0096 15;)0. 11.1 •• 3a.71S 2.0)0 1.052 "a"390.0.015\1 1500. 13••0. 33.537 2.00 I .... .100..0.0.011. 1300. UI.loI5 34• .1... 2.00 1.9•• 39~190.

0.0223 1300. 1a.'I03 35.611 a.oo 2.0G7 ;'9;'.90.O.O~" 13,)la. 2~.0•• 37.2:»0 2.00 ~.03. ;''''.7'10.o.oa.a I1GO. ot ... 1017 38••22 2.00 a. 0:i9 ;'9~1I90.

86

Page 97: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

PAUGUE-CIIACJ( GII~.J" tESt O.tA

s!"f:C.jIleN "'0 • • 2': •

.-0.63$ 1NC:H&a .-,).032 .NC,..'."PEllA'''''E -50 DEGRUS "

QJ tilt IUglt IlIl. ge 6 tl

0.0211 3:'90. 3 •••3 3•• 71111 0.69 0 •••1 ZllOI o.0.0121 19Z0. 1.872 3•• 175 6 ••9 0 •••1 :tft930.0.0005 IV.2G. 0 ••36 23.1 •• •••0 0.900 ....50.0.0070 I a.u:o. 0.390 23.2•• •••0 0.907 •••70.0.00Ct3 22030. 0.3.9 23.375 4 ••0 0.916 ••700.0.0098 10060. 0 ••36 <13.416 •••0 0.919 90760.0.007. 22100. (hll91 23.S11 •••0 0.9ae 11dd60.0.00•• 2.JO.0. 0.913 "oJ. 71. ••40 0 ••39 1.a..o.0.02.7 a.3.0. 1 ••51' a4.121 •••0 O....lI 166t1eO.0.047. 25410. 2.152 a.... '. • ••0 IoPO. 192a.0.0.OZ47 10..00. a.31. 2S.33ft ..40 1.03. aoa••o.o.oa.,. 10'1100. Z.511 Zla.8li. ..40 1.0.1 a137Vo.o.oz.o 9280. 2.7.,7 2••343 •••• ••0_ :!:!.J070•0.0338 12t150. .s•••0 Z7.105 •••0 1.12.1 4!3:t920.0.027. 7S70. 3.:J4Z Z7.621 •••0 1.141 a4.J.90.o.oa., 7510. .. ••27 2•• 201 •••0 1.173 aSl000.0.0323 8110. ..0.7 28.911 •••0 I.aoa aS9Uo.0.oa72 7sao. ..610 29••sa •••0 l.a3. • ••630.0.03.3 7350. 5.069 30•••• • ••0 1.2•• a'''MO.0.03.0 la:loJO. 5.6.12 31.307 4 ••0 I •••• a'....o.0.0273 4530. 0.3.,3 3a.03. • ••0 1.325 <1..4010.0.0230 ••70. 7.3S0 32.930 •••0 1.356 a ....o.o.03a. 4000. • •••0 33.7a. 4.40 1.3.5 a9""0.0.0.1.15 3500. 9••a3 3•• 1..2 ••• 0 1•• 15 a"'.380.0.03.0 3500. 10.1191 35.9l.>3 •••0 I •••a a""..o.o.oa•• ~l»70. &1."20 30."". • •• oJ 1•••1 .so"••o.0.0317 aCtao. &1.il34 ~8.Z7. • ••0 1.51. .aOS100.0.0~72 2030. a.aoo 3•• IIIU 4••0 1.51. 101130.o • .a.a I~.O. 1.007 3••600 4 ••0 1.6•• .10.....o• .a•• .1••0. 1.00.3 ~•• ,J44 a ••o 1.5.0 30101.0.0.01.0 2li.'O. 1.3.6 ,s.o,a a ••o 1••1. .1.030•o.oa.s 1.600. ..721 .IS. 1&I a.oo &•••1 4.11..,0.O.OZI' 1kt.o. '.132 a•• I,9 1 ...0 I •••• ..1310.0.0206 II ;)00. 4&.e,,7 a•• ..,3l1 a ••o 1.68.1 .5aIlIO.o.o.uo 11320. Jl.041 al.913 a ••o 1.'13 •••130.o.o~.o 7020. ....... 211•••5 z ••o 1.7:1. .711.0.0.03il .370. 3.9•• a9.71t:; a ••o •• 7•• .,,,.ao.0.0230 ..."0. ..3.0 .I0.<lZ. a.eo 1.'14 ••••10•0.030. • 330. S.la. 31."• .1 a ••o I ••",s ."a740.0.oa.7 :a.Jeo. $.a02 .32•••1 a.oo I ..... •••1ao.0.OZ93 ...0. '.3•• 34••0. a.60 1••77 lioaooo.o.oaoo aloo. a.No 3••~. a ••o I .... 1..100.O.OZI. aMO. 5 •••~ 36.13. iI.OO 1.911 so...o.0.0.131 2170. ••a05 ~••I. a.60 1.9ao 10.UO.••UII u •••• " ••9 • JO .... a.oo I .... .ao....o.0.01" ..10. ...... 31.... 2.00 1•••.3 ..,..0.O.OZ•• ra••• ...... Ja .... a.o. il•• IO U7....

••03M ..... ••a •• 34.17• a.o. ...., ............. ••••• ••••7 ~••7'" a••• a ••7. ..01...

.....3 ••••• ....' 37••7• •••• ••u • ......••u ... .a•••• l.a.p. ....... .... ..,~. .,at.

Reproduced frolftbest Ivailabl. copy.

87

Page 98: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

I'IiTIGUe-CAACK CORr••T.. TaST DIiTIi

5paCIM&N NO••2E.0

..0 ••04 I fIlCHES _.1.010 UtCH&S

TEII".. lljlTURE -SO DEaaaiS "Q6 11111 Q6DI Il& lie 6 Ii

0.0009 .70. ••a.s a~.'is.J '.30 0.900 ~"'070.

0.0053 27.(". ~.5~. Z'.ilOI ..30 0.9a. .lltSO.0.0065 ~a50. 2.003 2•• 2... '.30 0••20 .liOOO.0.0079 4000. a.I06 a••~~o • • .10 0.92. ••000.0.011. 5.50. a.a•• a •• 5.. ..30 0...0 5••S0.o.ola. 5650. .t •••5 2•• '90 ...... 0.9U &oaoo•0.01'1 5600. a .... a..... ..30 81.907 &5700.o.o.a. .010. .l ••ZJI as.a7. ..030 0 ••01 '0510.o.oa.o 'SOD. 3.09a 2••••9 '.JO 1.003 '1l090.0.oaa9 , •• O. .... ~ao a6.142 ••.JO ••oa, ••600.0.oa31 6570. 3.IH' 26.586 • ...0 •• 050 '1a070.o.OZOO 5940 •. .J ...u 27 ••a, .....0 a.o,a ..oao•1.019. sa20. 3••02 a'.6a.. 4.30 1.090 a03a30.0.01'9 • 610. '.0... 2'.4Ia .. • • .JO a.ao. 1077.0•0.009. 2...0. •• a29 2•• 0.12 '.30 a.aa. 11 0170•0.lIa20 5000. •.lit". a ••5a. ..30 •• a.o ...a70.o.oa.a 4a30. •• ".0 a ••M~ ••30 a.a59 .. 9300•o.oa •• 4000. lIo••aa 29•••S • • .10 I.aeo au~o.

0.oa9a Ja70. 5.7.a a ... "01 •• 30 l.a9• aa.570.0.01 •• 3a60. •• 0 •• JlO•.J.. ..30 ••117 .2'17030 •0.0211 3••0. ••237 30.M. .....0 a.23• a3..1a,0.0.011. 33.0. 6 ••57 3a ••". ..30 a.200 a3 ...0.o.oa.o 3.00. ....., 032•••7 •• 30 a.2•• a.03.0•0.oa03 3a",0. ,..- 32.'''0 .....0 a • .:I06 a• .I_o.0.0211 aoao. lI.a27 303.301 ..30 I.Jl20 a••aoo.o.oaao auo. 0.'1 • .1 ....OOot ••.10 a ....u •••7.0.0.02ao 2•• 0. ao •••• 34...Q ••30 a .... 'o a5laao.0.oa.7 a9liO. aa.a97 a.70. ..030 I ••oa· I•••~O.0.02al a '.0. a3.5S7 ..••••7 ••3. a ••Z3 ••••70•0.O..l2a a'.0. a••..,.7 .I7 •.JO. • •.JO a•••_ n,7MO.0.015" U50. a3••13 03•• 1•• ..03,) 1••7a a.9..0.o.oai. lZIlh ....ao 3a.a7. ..,JO a ..... ..0Uo•o.oal' la90. th2.a 39.U. ..30 a.500 aoaluo.0.0", 1330. 5 • .'1154 23..... a ••o a.6O. ..ot..o.0.0••• 3,JJO. a ••09 1••1" 1 ••0 ...a. 1••170.0.01 •• 01l10. it.oiI•• a•••• r a.oo a.53. a,a..o.o.oala ..00. a •••• as.070 a ••o •••S. Illl_O.0.0••7 7.40. ~.o.~ ilIa.c.•• a ••o 1••7. ..lMIIO.0.ltZ07 6770. ..... 27 a ••a07 •••0 1••9? a.".o•o.olao • 110. ~.7'• ~O.N. a ••o 1••19 a••~o.0.02a. 53••• ..aos a? ••a a. •• I .... a...o.0.033. 71000. .....a aa••• s a ••• 1.073 ........0.:32.'10 '.00. 5•••1 .O.SJ? •••• I .... II"••••...... 333•• ••0 .. M .... .... I.?a. ua••o •o...a. M.O. ..... 3 ...... .... a.? laOIO••...... ..... 7 • .11. .Ja ..... a ••• a.'" a....u ••...... U ••• ? ••.1 D ••a. I ••• 107M U .....I.". ~N•• 7.... ~..... a ... ...a. ......I ••, •• I.... ,.... ...... .... I .... g,....I.NN ..... •.0" M .... I." I .... ._.

88

Page 99: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

89

'ATIGUE-CRACK CORO""" TEST DArA

SPECIMEN NO. 4ZE 9

B.0.6~0 IIoICHES ".:1.015 • NC"ES

'EMPt.RArUtiot. -50 OEGAU:; P'

lIa ..~ gaga» ~ Qe 6 III

0.oa20 16,000. 1.56.3 J.J. :t7e. 6.6. 0.793 1'42~0.

0.033. 21370. I,.~sa 3U.030 '.40 O.l1Jl ilSbOO.0.0109 6510. 1.154 39.96", 7.70 0.8:55 LOZII O.0.0600 II 31 o. 1.809 .0.470 7.70 0 •• 76 113420.0.0206 334.0. 1.,$b5 2•••.27 4.$0 0.92. 14b900.0.022a 22000. 1.495 2••834 4.!oO 0."53 16 ..»00.0.0150 .~1'0. 1••57 2'h908 4.511 0.961 171270.0.0221 10130. 2.114 25• .:105 4.50 0.980 1.7400.0.0.2.20 •••0. 2.~1. 25.6c1a 4.50 1.001 19111860.0.0231 10ZZO. 2.479 26.147 4.50 1.026 20e.080.0.0179 7500. 2.627 26.4V' 4.50 1.044 21,j580.0.02110 10"'30. .e.91$ 27.0«11 4.50 1.073 oil,z.510.0.0302 10;)00. 3.277 27.726 •• 50 1.103 2.34!lo10.0.0~09 11.90. ~ ...BI .elh370 4.50 1.132 oil4 ~OI)O.0.0260 0930. 4.oJ1I8 211.980 4.50 1.IS9 24~"'30.

0.0280 7170. 4.061 2"'.'03 ••:.0 1.189 257100.0.oall2 57ao. It.322 30.,j71 4.5,) l.al6 202UO.o.oa09 3ll10. 6.09.:1 ,j0.1l9. 4.50 le236 266630.0.0229 36GO. 6.72. 3h:a01 4.50 1.259 2702.0.1l.0a20 33.0. 7 • .:109 32.1.$ ••50 I.ZQ 273..0.0.0304 3400. 7.796 J2.... 4.10 le309 277060.0.0216 29JO. e •.I6" 33.575 4.50 I .~"" 27"990.o.o.~o 1620. •• 7~7 3.:1.9.1 ..50 1.:1•• 28..,10.o.o~u 3e.40. II.5IS 34.957 4.50 1 • .37. 2116••0.0.0271 2570•. 10.1131 3!h77. 4.50 1.4a.J 2.7820.0.0300 28~0. 1<1.1011 36..1.l6 4.50 1."35 2lfO.70.0.013. IIZO. 1:1.0"" 37.<iOjit 4.,.0 I •••• Z.17.0.0.0277 .l150. lit.1 ~I 3•••02 ••~o 1.4_ Z"'~940.

0.0••0 1750. v....5 3V.lfJ4 ••50 1.497 2....0.0.03•• 1820. ...100 0$11••.:101 4.50 •• 506 .l971UO.0.0306 15.:170. ,j.it.O 25.1 .. Z.7a 1.:507 31aS80.0."" 7770. 0:.0." it~.'03 2.70 1.5117 UO"SO.0.0240 10120. 2.5.1 20.J71 2.70 1••11 33.:1470.0.OZ3. VJ70. .l.7e9 27.10S 2.70 I."'" .1.3"'''0.0.0211 7it"0. ,).0)•• Z".7~4 2.70 &.655 ~47~.0.

0...09 6770. .1•••2 211.~dO 2.70 1.677 353UO.0.0240 7500. .."03 29.27. Z.70 1.10" .:1.13&0.0.0330 7330. ~ ••27 .JO.4:OZ 2.70 1.7.16 a ......0.0150 a5.0. •..501 .J0.9... 2.70 1.7.9 :l7IZ.0.0.0240 3750. 1.725 .J1.~'. 2.70 I. "'lo .175010.0.0...00 ,J.OO. ....56 33.~S.z 2.70 1.1107 37••10 •o.oau 2210. " ••07 3:1.""" a.10 1 ...22 .... Jo.&O.O.OZI. a200. 6.Z31 34.5:1. Z.70 1.-. 382..0.O.OZIO 9700. ,..IZ. tl7.Z22 2.00 1.87. ".2WO.•••.:1•• 53:a1. ..0.1 a•• , •• Z.OO I."'.~ .:1978&0 •••0a31 .7••• 7••51 29•••2 Z••O 1.....:1 ••~N••...... .1•••• ••••• .1••••• •••• I .... ............ ~... 12.... 31.9.4 ••0. 1 ..... .......0.0... ..... I ..... .13 ••7' ••0. , •• 019 ••••••

aeproduced frombest l"lil,bl. copy.

Page 100: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

rA'.~YC-~R~K _ROW'" rell'-PATA

~pe~l~e" NQ. ale ~

..0.7001 • ..c... .-a.wa • ..cHE•

'E~PI!IlA'URE 10 I)eaua "U lltlI bUll Q& Ill! 6 III

O.OlllFl 10000. u.o•• .Ja.12:6 7.10 0.11011 IlOOO.O. 0'." 11100)0. :0."5. .J~.'15 7.10 0 ••61 22000.0.012' Jra o. '.MS ~1.7.' 7.10 0••7. a!i7'l0.0.0051 ~OOO. ••ao. ~'.I.JQ 5.08 0 .... a.,IO.0.020. la&OO. 1.'21 a••557 :6.05 0.9•• .1:S. o.0.01 •• • 4500. 1 • .165 ~4.15• s.o. 11.926 5S•• 0.11.01611 • 5500. 1 •••1 2S.G•• S.IIS 11.9.7 71:1.0.0.01 •• • 000. .....7 015.",,0 5._ 0.95• .001.11•11.11.21 ••a.o. a.967 016.049 5.0S •• 000 ..HO.0.0.7:S 6000. .J.5Z. 26.;'.' ..... 1.0.7 10.590•O.GaI' &000. •• 110 IO.II~1 5.05 1.0.0 110_11.0.0270 6000. '.705 27 • .101 5.0S I.MS II.HO.O.OZ•• 6000. 5.oJ71 aa.017 5.0S ..096 12a590.0.022. 3700. !i.7.0 ilia.47' 5.0:6 1.116 1262911•0.02•• .1>00. 6.a1O a9.0as 5.05 • • 140 l.Joa90.0.0.J.l3 5000. 6 ••91 019.160. 5.05 •• 172 1...2911 •1I.IIZ7. .000. 7 ••92 :SO.SOI 5.0. •• 0100 .19290•0.0270 ~5all. •• .13. II.UI s.n ••za. 161••0.0.oa7. 3300. ..0.0 31.9'. 5.0:6 ••1:.6 160UO•1I.0a.4 .1000. • 0.00. la.7•• 5.0• 1.2M ••9UO.0.0171 a700. .0.903 .J3.173 1.05 1.3.1 15••10.0.oa.9 1600. II •••• .1...... 5.0. I ....... 1:04a.0.0.oa.3 aloo. • a.'la 35.115 5.0.. a • .J66 1..... 0.0.015. laoo. loJ.oJ... IS.7a. ••0. l.oJ.l .5'.10•0.oa.3 1100. ...... 3li.JI. •• 06 ••3., 1.... 0•o.oa06 ."00. II•••• •" •• 1" s.o• • ••ao ••ao.o.o.o.SS laoo. 0.0.3 17.07a •• Oli ..eZI 1••alO.o.oz.a .allo. 0 ....5 "7••0~ ••os 1.430 l.a••o.0.0001 lS00. 0.0•• 11.050 1.9. 1•••0 1.9.. 0.o.ooJal la...o. 0.'" al..... a ••• I .... a • .JHo.o ....oe oJo••o. 0.951 21.79. a.96 &oUI 311690.0.01 •• .,300. 1 ••07 2•••6. a.91 ~.5H .J60990.0.0.17 16liOO. •••09 a ••07. a.93 • ...0 3.7.90.o.oa•• aOlloo. a ••91 ~••I" a.91 ...., 171••0 •0.0271 10300. 1 ••7. a6.10r 1.93 1••11 1.7790.O.Olal .SOO. ••••1 ar.026 a.91 1.....1 19• .190.O.O.OJ • 000. 6 ••14 a ••I •• 1.91 I .... .0•••0.0.01•• sooo. 7.0•• I ••UI a ••oJ •• 711 .09&90.0.037. SOOO. •••31 JO ••I. a." I. rso .1...0.o.oau 1.00. •• 1•• .JI .... ..... ..770 •• ,&90•o.oa.1 1000. 7.r36 1...Il. 1••3 •••0' ••01.0.0.0171 1000. 7••1 .J6.119 a.loJ a.'M .a~o.

O.Nao .00•• •••71 1....7 1••0 1..... •••190.0•••a9 .so•• ...... a7.... a • .Io 1 ••79 4oJ,790....... ...... .I.a... ar ..... 1.1• 10 ... .a.r........, I •••• ......1 a7.... •• IV 1••vl ....,...o.... r I .... ••ua ...... ••a• • 1 ...1 ...,...••O.la u ••• ...., a..... I.ao •••a.l ....060•...... H" • ..... ...,.. a... lo9.J.J ..7....

90

Page 101: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

~AIIGUe-CRACK ~.I" TESI DAIA

a".'IIIIIH NO. 231 5

..0.70S • He". _3.00S INCHEi

TIIIPEIIAT",.E 0 DE....EES ..

~ Qil ilAQtIl WI. Qe A ~

0.0132 11000. 3.033 a3.90~ S.OS o ••all 36780.0.01l19 2S000. 1.710 ~4.$44 !:io.O$ 0.92S 61780.0.0203 172.10. 2.0•• 2•• lI46 !:io.05 0.'14. 79000.0.0322 15000. 2.a•• 25•• 12 5.0$ 0.977 94000.0.03.311 1I.J00. .3•• 111 26.1>13 5.0)$ 1.009 10$:100.0.0527 12dOO. ..231 26.li'a. 5.05 1.059 JJltlOO.0.072. ISOOO. 5.339 2e.50D 5.0S 1.1.19 133100.0.0.... 10000. 0.230 29.829 5.05 • .185 1.~IOO.

0.0• .39 lilOOO. '.36. 31.47. 5.05 1.249 183100.0.0.09 10000. ...51. 34.001 1l.05 1.0337 163100 •0.04611 :.000. 5 .... 7 .35.00r 5.05 1.3'0 1••100.0.0515 5000. 3 •••• .35.00" Ii.O!» 1• .170 173100.O.lUll' 30oaOO. 1.195 21.43. 2.-I.J 1••21t 20:1100.0.0060 11910. 0.$7. 21.:.05 2.9.1 1••32 21~010.

0.0113 42920. 0.2•• 2&.7,s, 2.93 1•••3 257931J.0.004.3 31500. 0 • .32a 21._.1 2.9'" 1•••9 1I894.J0.o.ol.a 270ao. 0.fo511 22.07Z 2.93 1••59 :11••50.0.00.' 26.50. 0 •••• 22 • .;1•• 2.'13 1.473 ...<E900.1l.01IM 211eo. I.S02 22.". 2.93 1.492 3.4080.11.029. • 5000. 2.03. 23.262 2.9.1 1.513 .3''''060•ll.OUIS 13000. 2 ....2 23.94. 2.93 I.M2 .392060.0.052. 11380. 2.M7 2•• '~tl. 2.9.1 1.57,'J .o~••o.0.0209 10200. 1.1171 2S•• '''' Z.9.1 1.600 .1.10.0.0.007. 63ao. 2.166 25.7'7 2."'''' 1 •• '0 .ld040.

Iteproduced frombest Ivailable copy.

91

Page 102: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

'ATIGUE-CRACK GRO.TH 'eST DATA

s ..eC • .e6N hU. z.Je •

..O.TOI lNC..- • _a.9•• lNC..-.

,."PEIi,.TURE • OiOGaUS ,.

gj QlII Q6QI H lie 6 It

Q.oa~3 2220. ••09' 33 ••87 7. '0 0.173 29220.Q.oa76 Z~2S0. a.I.' "....... s.os 0.9.0 5...70.0.0353 21830. 2.S0' 25.327 s.o. 0 ••6. 80300.O.O<tllT 11 ••0. 3.184 25.905 s ••• 1.001 921.0.O.O.~ 11500. ••1.' 26.633 ••0. 1.03. 103..0 •0.0••5 10000. •••7. "7.60. li.05 1.082 , '3680 •0.0277 5000. 5.111 ZI.191 s.os 1.101 &1"'0.0.0... 5000. li.IOI • ••79. .... 1.135 '&36e0.0.0218 5000. ••••• Z9.4.1 5.05 I ••~ la8..0.O.UO. 5000. 1.1.' .:10.1£60 s.os 1.195 1""..0.0...» 5000. 7.'16. 3 ••236 s.OS 1.233 13.680.o.o~•• .000. 8 ••1'7 3Z.loS2 5.04 I.Z68 l.a....0.0194 3000. 9.15. .:12.'13. 5.05 l.a9. 1.5••0.0.032. .:Isoo. 9••3. 33••;). $.OS 1.3a. 1.'I.aO.0.0368 • 000. 11.,).5 3:i.03• S.OS •• 363 HUIOO.0..... ...50. ' .... 76 3_.$40 5 ••• 1••&' '51'0..0.••031. IISO. 10• .14. 37.1'a• ..0. 1•••6 1591.0.0.02.2 1540. ...,). 37.... 5.05 &•••6 '607ao•0.02:10 loS70. ••••• 3••a31 ..05 1.456 1.a090.0.01." "'''50O. 0 ..... &.1.3a7 &..... &•••1' '.0••0.0.00.0 19550. 0 ••1'9 &3.637 &••0 1.'10 ZOOI•••O.OOS. .0.10. 0 ••6' &.1•••6 a ... Ie,al ",Ja..o.0.0109 .117 •• 0.a.3 a ••oa8 a ... 1.1IaO • ••120.0.00741 z.ooo. 1.40.1 a ••2ge a ••• 1.=54,) 21'.&ZO.0.0112 .1S90. I. PI. a4.7• .1 a ••• I .... a89710.0.01176 ••000. ..0•• ~7••9a a.90 1.6S. 3a.71O.0....7 10000. S •••l1 • '.Oso a ••• 1.0.7 33'1710•0.01.7 5000. 7 .... 29.71. a ••z 1.7a8 34.7&0.0.04.1 .000. ••411 JO.877 a ••a 1.7.7 3••7'0.o.oau "0.0. 'II •••• .u •••• a.92 1.77a 350710.0••• 07 2000. .....37 3a.s•• a••• 1.798 :SS27l o.O.'~.II ~.,OO. " •••a 3J.7•• a.92 I..Z. 355710.0.oa7. aooo. •••07 3••li.1 • ...a I .... 35'710.0...01 10000. ••Z.9 3a.~01 a.4. • ••22 367710•0.0:136 31••• II.a•• $3.770 a.4. ' ••47 37....0.0.OIa6 10.0. loa.,;,... .J4 • .II1;' •••• 1••58 .11'1.0.0 ••1.0 IO~O. I •••al 3•• 071 2 ••• 1.972 312.0.CI.ClUtO 1000. Ht.'O. .15.9&. a••• ..9. ~7.JaO•0 ••16. 1000. 17.1'" 36••'" a.4. 2.003 374.0.0.017. • 000. ,,,.00. J7.9a.1 a ••• a.oao J'~.O•0.01 •• 10100. &1.08. , ••17. a ••• a.M. 31'••0.o.o.a.l '000. U ••70 .0._7 2.44 a.o•• .177.0.0.oa.9 ,.,00. z...".o • a • .I3:1 a ••• z.o•• J7••0•

92

Page 103: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

·PAIIGUE-CRACK GAD.IH TEST DAIA

SPt!C. MIN NO. 62.. 1

eaO.7a5 • NC....S ....... 000 INCHES

lEOlPERArUAe -SO a.loRas "

Q6 Wf g6Q!l ~ De ! III

0.00.. 3 1112 o. .1.001 23. 1Iv.l 5.U 0.813 .91.0.0.o)a31 22270. 2.013 1 •• :>9. 5.23 0.915 11.10.0.0~01 111290. 2.I<;a 2••9.1. 5.23 0.93. 1101700.0.031., 123.0. 2.31' 25••51 5.23 0.9_ 102040.0.OiU5 11000. 2 •• 30 25.aS6 5.2.1 0.9all UOo.o.0.023. 10000. 2.31. 26.397 5.a3 1.017 120040.o. l217 10000. 1.9tH 2•• '2. s.a3 1.03. 1300.0.0.01 •• 7.50. 1.796 27 •• 0. 5.13 •• 052 137..0.0.01 • .3 1<1000. 1.....1 27.450 5.a3 1.069 1.9..0.0.0150 uo~o. 1.727 27.7.7 5.23 1.0•• 161••0.o.oaoo 11.120. 2 •• 36 .l•• 3•• 5.a3 1.110 177210.0.0323 II ;Jao. 3.3.9 Z••974 5.13 1 •• 37 111.2.10•0.0::'.0 10il!.0. •••95 29.870 5 • .113 1.175 19.510.0.0.1.5 1100. 5.410 30.7.3 5.13 ..211 100010.0.02•• .720. 5.'•• 31 ••72 5.2.1 I.Z37 210730.0.0.10. ...ao. Co •••• 3Z.293 ~.a3 1.267 215550.0.0150 2.190. 7.-,sa 32.709 5.23 1.2.Z 217940.0.0211 sooo. ••90'" 33••06 5.23 1.3ao 112940.0.0..... 4030. 11.0.3 3...W.... 5.2.1 1.357 226970.0.027. 2720. 11.06. 35.96.. 5.23 1.389 2a"'090.0.02.11 1170. 1.1.90. 3«>.73_ 5 • .13 I ••• a 23&460 •0.0250 11110. 13.229 37.0.9 ••23 1 ....3 133Z.0•0.022ft 2.130. •• 729 .1•• 0119 5.2-' •••50 235570.4.0523 16.0. 2 • .1.. 9 31•• 7.. 5.23 1 ••60 237Z.0.0.;1",•• .0000. • •••1 23.796 .1.0.1 1.526 21'250.0.0 •• , 2S,),)0. 1.7Z. a ..... I 3.03 1.561 30Z150.0.041.2 20000. a • .I.2 25.6;19 3.03 1.5"" 322250.0.0=0.1. 23"'60. 3.990 27.5.2 3.03 1•••2 3....110.0.0.171 lu70. ~.li4a 111.750 3.0a &••98 3....0.0.03•• so~o. ...,.. 29.632 3.0.1 •• 723 359..0 •O.O~.O :.000. •• 0.2 J11.01~ 3.03 1.760 .J6.....0 •0.0435 s~oo. '.332 32.d04 3.03 1 ••01 3.....0.O.OIU 2000. 6.332 33.5;U 3.03 1 •••9 37...0.0.11101 1000. 'h iIt 7. J13.~39 3.03 1. _10 372....0.0.00•• JOOO. •• 09. a•••• , I ••~ 1••.11 ..75..0 •0.0371 92.0. 0 • .117 30••~0 a.53 ••••0 3.S130.0.0••• 7CoOO. 1.1.110 34 ••10 2 ••~ 1.961 392730.0.oa.2 I~OG. 15.9... 36.G•• 2.5.1 1.99. 3".730.0.0.2. 2000. 1••050 30.0•• 2 .... 2.02. 396730.

Reproduced frombesl availabl. copy.

93

Page 104: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

~ATIGuE-C.ACK GRO.'~ ,a.T 0"1'''

S~.C lieN NO. I~E 6

..0.7015 INCHES _~.00. INCte.

' ••NR"'UM a 01:....... ~

ga .. RAg, a • 6 Cl

0.01:S- 10260. 1.866 32.80- '.09 0.044 30,,.0.0.0101 '0000. I.' 09 ;'1.5.903 15.015 0.8.3 491500.0.01'6 '0000. 1.125 1••.z.9 15.015 0.1l06 .'560.O.O~" ~0'00. 1•• 01 1••72a 5.0' 0.'30 .'660.0.0302 186.0. a.40. 2s••ao 15.01' a ••" '06.1Z0.0.0.0' 12870. .a•••• 2•• 016• 5.07 1.0OS 11"190.0.0.. 31 10000. 3 ••01 2••IUl 5.0. 1.03. lall'.O.0.01" .000. '.11' 21'.30. ••0. '.01' '''.''0.~.oa., ~OOO. 11.327 21'.'" S.D. 1.092 1...190.0.0••, 5000. ...003 aa.3" .... 1.lao ' •• '90.0.022. 5000. .. ••3. 29.1toll 5.05 1•• 56 .531.0.0.~3.7 5000. '.200 29."1'7 ..0. 1.190 '114"'0.0...01 sooo. ,.,.. .10 ••01 la.O. , .1i!4 ' ....90.0.0399 SOOO. ••••• 3a.o~:. 5.0. 1.2lt6 1001.0.0.0213 2500. 9.117 32.659 5.0. ,.a•• 1'0.",0.0.0115 i!SOO. ... 710 "3.2.~ 5.0. '.311 1'...90.0.02.0 2500. 10.... 3~ •• '0 5.0S 1• .;13. 11'5..0.0.oa.7 2.00. II ••H 3•• ",.1 5.05 1.3.3 .,.190.o.on. a.oo. 11.11. 3•••10 ..0. I ....' 11106•••0.033. 2••0. 4••16 36.0911 5.0. I ••O~ 1.3ZTCh0.0183 1200. I.a.l. 38 •.166 11.05 1••11 1•••70.0.0371 saa. o. 0.522 22."'i 2 ..... 1.4.1 2.a680.0.00•• 20000. 0.32a 22.... 2 ... I ...... a.a....0.0009 1• .1:30. 0.300 22 •••0 a ... I .... 2.1....0.0005 llUUO. 0.311 aa ••loa 2.'. '.4". 300••0.0.00.0 20:300. 0•••7 .13.0.7 2.9e. 1••41. 320MO.IhOla. 20000. 0•••3 23.a90 ~... •• 1503 34MifO.0.01.' aoooo. 1.~.1 23.'3a a.96 '.522 S.M.O.0.02.0 10000. .z.o•• a'.'03 a.V#> 1.5•• 3aD..0.0.0•• 2.000. 3•• 11 a•• 1.17 2.96 1••1. .06••0.0.OS.5 10000. 4.0.a 27.171 2 • .,.

I ••'. .1••90.0.0••7 10000. ..766 a •• o.. a.90 1....3 .2•••0.0.0109 1••0. $.0.. a ...... 2.9.1 1.'01 .a~70.

0.03• ., • "0. •• a •• 30.Ii.JII a.",s I • .,.'" .3'3.. 0 •O.O.SI • ODO. 1 ••6' 31.35.. 2.P~ 1.770 "I~O•0.0~37 .000. 9••75 .12.7... 2.M I .... • ......0.o.ol.a :1000. .,.30a 33.0... a ••• 1••3. • • .aUO.o.oass aooo. '1.0'. 3•• 353 a ••, I .... ..0UO.o.oa•• 1000. 9.2•• 3....... a ••, 1 ••'9 '."UO.O.O~'. !II"'OO. , •• O. "I. '01 a ••• 1."1. .IU.:IO.

94

Page 105: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

~.JI~UE-C••CK ~R~.r" rEST o.r.

5peCl ..e~ ~a • ••E •

..0 .... INC... ••2 • .,,,. IMetCS

JEMPeR.tURE '0 DECiIlIEES ~

g4 IItI Q6Uli ~ lie l "0.0la51 :i000. 5.331 3•• liO. 6.00 0.V3" 216020.0.01•• • 300. •• Z8. 25• .57• 4 • .10 0.960 36.5Z0 •0.030_ 20000. it • .-o' 2••21!t 4 • .10 1.00. !t63'l0.0.oa64 20000. it •••6 26.V19 4.30 l.o-a '6:'20.o.ooao a4.00. 4 ••• ' 28.90. ••.:11 1.1:.0 100920.0.0121 3600. $.947 29.1"0 4.:U 1.142 10.520.0.004. 10000. ' ••3. .10.5.- 4.aa 1.20' 114NO.0.0.0. 5000. 9.0.7 31.". 4.30 I.Z•• ll"NO.o.o.r. 5000. 10.150 33.101 ••..10 l.a.. la.NO.0.0406 .1600. lZ.i1190 "4.2'oi '.:'0 1.333 laalitO.O.o.H 4000. 11.004 35.11'''' 4.27 1.39a 1.-,U20.O.OSOO .USO. 10. '90 3,..9'S ••2. 1.429 l,saa70.0.0561 3300. 5.:'70 ~'.~Ol '.Z. 1.43" 13In.70.0.OQfo3 61010. .£.013 ll.S7I 2••0

1.__14••'0.

0.01 •• 30000. 0.9a6 23.5100 2.51 1.50. 1,..'0.0.011il7 31000. 0.5.3 23.0•• 2.10 I.N3 aOla67••0.00.1 12000. 0.~75 2.1.506 2.4,. 1.IU3 217.70.0.12•• IS.liSO. 4.03. .10.004 2.50 1.729 :'7.220.0.U,7 aoooo. 7.100 .1&••711 a ••• I." 3...,zaO.0.la21 10000. 1.6'1 3••130 a ••o 1.... '06zaO.0.0.4. 7aso. ....al 32.'.1 Z.OO 1.... .1,s.70•0.01.3 &000. 7 ••30 033.... a.oo ' ••'1 .llIi.70.0.0115 1000. 1.l.IO. 33.~ Z.OO I ••'. .'6.70.0.01.' 1000. 13.a.S 3 ••••• a.oo 1•••• .17.70.0.013' 1000. 1•••11 350370 z.oo z.ooz 41.470.O.Ola. 1000. 1•• V50 .s••&017 a.oo it.OI' 4''''70.0.0173 1000. ,..... "7.a'.- 2.00 it.OM 4aO.70.0.011' liOO. ZO.09. 37...... a.oo z.o-. 420"70.o.Ola. !i00. .10.4 ,. .1•••0' 2.00 Z.OM UI.70•0.009. 500. 20.971 39.3a, Z.OO Z.067 411 "'0.0.00•• ;JOO. aO.006 '-'.It.1 1 ••• z.or, 4az.,o.o.oalO 1000. &9••1' 3•• &09 I ••' a.ova 4&...70.0.0110 1000. •••••• 5ItoO.' 1 ••0 z.~ .iIl••70.

Reproduced frombesl a..,ail.ble copy.

9S

Page 106: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

PA'IG~-~~_~. ~U.," ,••, DATA

IPe~I"~ ~. • •••

• -0.11.' INC... .-a.v.3 INCHIU

JUIPEllnUIIE '0 PlaR"S P

D6 .. WAQCII lK III! l ..0.02.1 5000. d••8. 32.0Z0 6.00 0.'92 11000.0.0.1'. ~~r ,,_ 1.282 .1•••9$ 6.00 0.021 a6000 •0.007. ••ro. e.r'2 32 •••7 ••00 0 ••'1 I,_ro•0.0.» 5000. 5.'03 33• .135 6.00 0 ...7 22_ro.0.0.1. .1Ii00. ..003 33.'0.1 6.00 0 •••• 26V'0.0.01'77 ISOOO. a.a9. 24.73. '.30 o••aa 6a.ro.o.o.a. .11000. I.:S•• 25••00 ••30 0 ••71 '''Sl70•o.o••a 20000. 1•••7 25••79 ••30 0•••• 9.070.0.0310 30000. a.311 a6.811 ••30 1.036 laa970.O.OZ •• 113l10. a.V96 27.156 6 • .s0 1.053 1.1.3&0.0.... aoooo. ••••• • ••06.1 4.30 1.laa H.....O.0.0••• 12600. S.'61 30.152 6•.n 1•••• ICIICIINO.0 ..... 0000. .."S %, ••lfll ••3a l.a.lO 11••ao.0.0.13_ 50,)0. 1.011 3a.16. '.ao l.a6. I,..,.ao.O.OS156 ••60. ..V6a 33• .309 '.30 1.'00 .0.11110•D.O••• 5~OO. 10.'3' ....,. 4.32 1.3•• 1• .".,0.0."'. 5000. 10•••7 .1,.". 6.:a1 1.6" 19••70•0."'0 uoo. 3 ••.32 37.0.1' 6.31 ••••• a...070.0 ..... 3100. a .... 37.7.. 6.31 1.63. aOll'o.O.H... 1.10000. 0.7aa a••633 a.so a.S.3 331170.0.011. 600a•• 0.977 as.a,. a.5O 1.57. 3,. .70.0.00•• a.oo •• ...~~ a..... a.s. a.59. ~'I1'O.O.OIU7 _0••0. a •••• 1".;'.0 1.50 1.6.0 6.1.170.0.H6. 100••• • ••0' .1..a9. a.so 1.'0. • ••• .,0.O.llS. 10.0•• 5.,..,. 33.'9a a.s. a ••_ .r • .,o.0.0••• 500G. 5 •••• ;a•• '#4,a a ••2 • ••sr .7•• 70.0.0... ..00. ..a•• 30•• '" 1.0" ...... • ••a,o.1l.01U 0.00. 7.9.' .1.t.5.3. l.oJ.. I •••., .9.a,0•...... ••••• 3 •••• 33.732 I.V7 1.9" ••~.,O.

96

Page 107: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

rA'I~~c-'RACK Gaa.,~ 'ES' 0"'"

.~CIII&N .. a. Z.JE I

8.0.735 INC... •••••97 INCICS

'''....ER..l' liRE 70 OE~kS P

U Ila R6Qt1 QJ' lie fA Ii

0.0.110 10000. 9.:J9. 33.319 7.37 0••7. 2SMO.0.014. 10000. ,J.164 .t4 • .312 5 ••• 0.899 :J6.'0.0.0.92 31)000. 1.64. 25.187 5••• 0.9S2 65800.0.011.1 13800. 1."1 2S.Jl67 5.2. 0 ••63 79.00.O.M.' 22040. JI.OOO Z••JlI' !i••9 1.014 . 101.40.O.OJl:JI 10750. .I.... Z6.9M 5.29 1.045 II &390.0.0••:J 10000. 4 ••39 17.6•• 5.2' 1.0.. 11.3.0.0.0'57 sooo. 5.608 Z••:J77 5.29 1.111 127390.0.0210 .110. "176 28.~11 5.29 a.U6 a3a MO.D..... 7000. 7.ZS. Z•• 9:JS 5.2. 1.1.1 a3.8OO.0.M.6 6100. ••67. 310130 11.2. a.IU' a••600.0.0• .11 5000. 10.1.1 32.3.3 5.1. 1••7. 1•••00.G.OH9 3.00. 11 ••77 3:J.3.0 5.'. 1.30. a5:JOOO.0.O.:l71io 3140. 13.17a .14.503 5.Z5 1.346 ase ••O.O.O.l.Z .1000. a••••• 3a..... 5 ••• 1.3.7 a:>.a.o.0.0.1.12 ZOOO. 1•• JI•• .16.... S.a8 a ••18 16U.0.o.oalV 1.:100. a7•••• 37•••0 5.17 a ••39 a6'_0.0.0160 1000. 12••75 3•• a"" 5.27 1,.'7 a6""0.0.0070 300. ••••0 1•• a311 5.19 l •••a a637.0.0.004. .:100. I.S9Z :J•••aa 5.29 a •••• a.4MO.0.014:J 11050. 0.901 2a.6(;6 3.0. 1••7. 17SMO.O.OllV .I66S0. 0.SS6 a3.09. 3.06 a •••• .0.,.0.0.011. .157'0. o ••la 13.sa1 3." a.1I1O ••S480.0.00V2 100000. 0.'6' 2••576 3.0. 1.SSJI "!i....0.0.1•• 170.0. 1.a64 24.543 3.05 a.561 J6.~0.

0.01.~ 1.000. z.o.o as.407 3.0. 1.sn :I.osao.0.032" a0870. .:s.117 26."'. 3.0. 1 •••6 'Oa3•••0.02111 10010. .:s.1I86 a, • .;I4. 3.0• 1.6S1 411400.0.093V 20000. 5.1114 '0.717 3.0' 1.7•• ~1400.

0.M.2 lIOOO. ~.la6 .:s1 ....0 3.0. 1.776 6.1640••0••U2 1000. ••S•• 3a.17. 3.0. 1.7•• .37.00.o ••a;1I 7000. ~.r.7 27..... a ••• 1••aa •••••••0••a26 4000. 3•••3 a"••l1 0 ••4. 1••30 • ••40••0.00.. ;SOOO. ....79 27.665 a.66 a ••3• •• 160••0.01091 3.00. ..316 27.9916 a.46 1•••7 •••400.o.oloa • aso. ..Z07 28.7'1. a.46 I .... .5.....0.01•• 1.0•• ••1.0 1-;••39 •••• t .... ..t ....0.001.0 ~ooo. ....70 30."4 a ••• 1 •• 13 .......0.0••• 2lJO•• 11.1 •• sa.oS." ••43 t.9S4 .....0.O.o.ul 200•• 13.0•• H ... 1 a ••6 1•••• ..OSIIO.0••17. "50. 14.aS5 33.70. a ••.1 1•••1 .7.100.0.... t3 or••o. ...4&.7 .....I~ a ••• a.014 .72:S00.

97

Page 108: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

PA'IGue-CRACK '-U.'H 7!ST OA7A

SPECiMeN Ne. ~~& Z

"0.7a. INCHES; .".1.iJOO INCMES

re-eIl,llTU'Ie 70 oe....... P

IH W. lUllIII a AM! 6 III

0.0159 ld.U·O. 2.&0~ 2•• 7;'5 5.20 0.9,.0 ••~70.O).O,JO,J 17000. 1.6as 25.077 5.2iJ O.HI 6 ......70.0.00.6 11100. l.aa5 25.010 5.410 0.947 71.70.0.00•• 17000. •• 5 .... 2S...... 5.20 0 .... •••70.0.0292 20000. a .... a••••• 5.410 0.995 10 ••70.0.0.159 10000. ~.a3a a .....oo 5.ao l.oaa uII.ro.0.oa60 0000. .....1. il....... a.ao I.OSO 12••70.o.oza. 6000. ••aaa a7•• ra 5.410 1.075 l.1a.ro.0.U70 .000. .... r a8.016 5.410 1.101 l ......ro.0.01•• • o~o. ••••• 2..... 5.2• ..Iao l.a.70•0.0411. .000. •••• 7 a .....1 5.410 1.1.... l •••ro.0.oa62 .0lUI. 6 • .,.3 29.582 5.ao 1.16• Ilt".ro.0.0...07 • 000. ••••5 .10.2a• lhao 1.19. IS••70•o.o~oo .000. 7.a7a ..0.11111 5.410· I.aal ....ro•o.oa.1Z .1000. 7.1177 31 •• , .. 5.410 l.a.a 161.ro•0.0.:11. • 000. 9.1.9 .12.a7. 5.19 1.27• 1.5.70.O.U." a.oo. 10.050 U .... •• 19 l.a9.. 1.'.70.0.oaZ9 aaso. 10."'7 33.... 5.20 ...121 Ir0120.0.0.10. a.so. la.167 .......5. 5.1. 1.:lU .r2770.o.oa.o aooo. IZ.IIS. .1•••11 s.a. 1.:17. lr.7ro•O.O.lZI U50. 1.....la .......0. s.ao I ••or Irrozo.0.01.. uoo. 15.';'.1 36e663 5.1. 1••U 17.120.0.017. lJ50. 101.7.1' 37.~ ..20 1 •••1' 17".ro.o.oaoo 10.:10. ••••• 37.r71 s.a. I •••• lllo.ro.0.01 •• 1000. 1 •.Ja. .111.1•• !a.ao •••56 1111.'0•0.00.16 10000. o...a. aa•••• .1.03 ••••• 19••ro.0 ...0. 1.0000. 0.6•• a~••5" .1.0.1 ..... .1.1I.r ••0.010. aOOlto. o ...a .. a3.i165 .1.00 I.Ma 351.ro.O.lIlJ. 1.750. 0.93. a ••;t~ .1.00 I •••• ....6220.0.0••• 1.IS0. ••• .1. a ••9ra .J.O.1 1•• ra ~3r••O.01aa • u.o. •• a •• 2••2...9 .1.0.1 ••582 .....NO.0.0.1a7 a5r.o. a.a3. a ••a .. .1.03 1.6.9 ••• a70.0.029. la.oo. .I • .J •• ar.... .1••3 ....r ....3 ..r ••0.0267 9700. ..... a ••aa• .1.0... 1••82 ••.1.7••0.0••• • aoo. O•• liI. a"'.71 r ..1.0.1 ..72!a .12'70•0.0.11.1 .000. •• 13. .'I..... J ••3 l.r.r ••r77••o.oas... J400. 9 ••al ...1 .... .1.0.. 1.7.., ..0770.o.o.na JOOO. • 1.2,U J3.ar" .1.O.J 1 ••• .1 ".171'0•0.H9. .000. ......... .1.1.'0' .I ••• ..IIoil. •••71'0••• o•• r 1000. •••ao• .... .1•• 3 ••• I ••"'• ...770•••0 • .11 100•• • "' •• 1'7 .I........ .1.0. ...... 460770•....,. liOO. 1:..aa.1 .....a.a .1.00 '.Ma ..727•••••••1 ftO•• •••••3 .1••'04 .1.0• ..... ..rrro•

98

Page 109: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

rATIGUe-e~ACK GAO.fM TelT DAfA

IPeCI~eH HO • • .11 ..

• -0.60S ...c... ..~.oao INCHas

........ fln""e 0 o.uus r

~ QtII UlUlI Q5 De 6 ta

O.OO~" 1.560. 0.31. .1"••36 ".30 0.95. 63aoo.o.ooeo ..157'<10. 0.2.16 25.002 ..30 o.wal' ",,~70.

o.ooa" 31300. 0.21. 15.0• ., ••30 0••71 t3".70.0.00.ot3 1'260. 0.250 2a.a". ••30 O.'lfl'a 1""30.0.0000 &7160. O.it66 25.202 ".30 0••7. 16.1.0.0.01•• "5Z50. 0.6Z. 25 ••.10 ".30 0.'.1 .110."0.0.0097 152ao. 0.7'77 2••••Z •• 30 0..... 2.1'700.0.0&".3 alzao. 1.",aO 2••0 .. 7 " • .10 l.oa7 a.".,.o.0.oa7.3 I.VOO. 1.907 26••6. ..3D I .... 27UMO•o.oal. ••"0. I."•• 2••67. ".30 I.OS7 .17••.10.0.0.11.1 13790. z.a06 27.3.a ..301 1.0'10 290310.O.03atl ....0. il.77. 27.903 ..30 1.115 300170.0.01•• 96.10. 3.1'5' 2••S03 •• .1" 1.1.1 30.,..0.o.u"a 71160. .3.212 2W.t.<I " • .30 1.170 .1'1'_0.0.032. 10330. ..0." 29.... ".30 t.ao. 327990.0.0.301 ~60. 5.075 ~o••oa " • .30 I.za. 33:Nt.O.0.00a5 5660. ....72 ~I.3a• ".30 1.2... 33.310.0.0.... "it20. I'.V07 U.OZI ..30 I.z.a 343NO.0.026. 36.0. 9 ••a. 32.062 ..~o I.~U 3.72ao.0.0.1.1 ~I.O. ••7•• 3.3.11.. • ...0 1.34. ".0_0•0.0.171 26.30. 10.723 34.700 ..30 1.37. 3130&0.IhOllO ••0. 10.~I. ~••O.ll ••.30 I.~a. .~O.

0.0300 2960. IZ.9al 3•• 033 ••30 1.413 3...0.0.02.0 1600. 1••700 36....~ ••.30 1•••.1 ......0.0.0007 I.ao. .l3.1.0 .17..... ••30 t ••li. 35.MO•0.04.. 12.0. zt.7M .....lf7 ..30 I .... ..;a.70.O.OhO 360. ZZ.3.3 .3•• 0110 ••30 t .... 36t230.O.Ozao I.SO. V.19Z 39.3•• ••.30 I.SOS ~2.NO.

0.0000 11.0. .1.777 • 0.067 ..30 1.523 36.UO•O.UM 10~IO. 1.601 • 7.913 5.00 I.HI 37.1..0 •0.Ol~3 3a710. a.la' 26•••0 Z.70 1...1 .0....0.0.0.1.0 ".0.0. a.33. .17.1.. a.so I ....~ ......0.o.oz•• 13000. a.7•• a7.,,7 a.so 10'" .1...0.0.0.0. 9660. 2."32 z ••as. 2 ••0 1.6.7 ••10300.

Reproduced frombest a"ailable copy.

99

Page 110: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

PATIGUR-C.ACK ~U.," '.'T DATA

~!CI ••" hC• • 2. 5

..0•••3 INC"•• _J.OO• INC....

JlU•••,.'U•• 70 I).~U. P

II. 61111 llJQIII a II! • III

0.0... ,.a.o. z.la.a a•••• O& • • .:10 0.'14' .li9.JO.0.0177 aalJO. l.la •• a •• 960 4.30 0."7 li."O.o.oao. d.OO. 0.".7 a••o~ • ...0 0 •••• ....0.o.oao. ' •••0. 0•••1 as.S71 ..30 D.'''' 9.040.0.0.0. l71110. 0.7U as.771 4 • .:10 I ••oa lOtl.O.0.015., a.alo. 0.735 a•• o:s. 4.30 1.0•• U~060.

0.00J7 ••uo. 0••73 a••••5 4.30 I.oa. 1.7IM/O.0.01" l7aoo. ••a07 a•••,. ..JO .;u. •••790 •0.01'. .IIJOO. ••7.l a••lJ2. ..30 ..... 1.....0.o.oa•• 13•• O. 2••7. .7.66' 6.30 1.007 .9.500.0.03.7 lIV-O. ~ ...OO a••131 6.30 1.117 ao....o.0.032. 9700. 4.110 a ••".a •• JO •• IS. a ••uo •0.06.0 10lolfiO. S.lol" ~O.OIU ....0 1.197 aa•••o.0.04 .9 7••0. •• 1" 3 •• 011 4.3,) ••2S. 1£3...0.o.u!>o 6000. 7.4" 3a.091 ••30 I.a,. a•• ,oo.0.OJ7. ."0. •••7. J3.11.. 4.30 •• Jla lol•••• O•o.oa •• 2.70. 9.0a. ~.'''O1 ••30 ••3U .....0.0.03.' .ItUO. Il.UIO 3•• 701 ..30 1.361 alil"O.0 .....0 395O. •a.510 36.a.16 ..... 1.61a a5...0 •0.0.1" 22ao. •.1.121 37....5 ••..to I .... alII....

100

Page 111: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

PAT&~e-C.ACK GaO.," TEST DATA

SPIC. Ut'" HU. 41E 7

.-0.637 IhCHES _.1.011 INCHES

UlMPt.Il ..TUAE 0 De:oiAUS P

CU QIlI iUQIII 1m. Q£ 6 ~

0.027. 4920. .1• .,99 Z8.6al 5.liO 0••7. 20990.0.0050 17lf>20. I ...... 2••9.5 ~.70 O.VI& .4SI0.0.0045 ".020. ~.3.2 Z5.&~!5 •• 7C1 CI.920 .oI~O.

CI.00.2 21~70. 0.ol06 25.&9.1 4.70 0.9Z4 9.~00•0.0027 176&0. 0.a2. 2s.a•• •• 70 0••27 11.37& o •0.00•• Z.030. o.a•• 2S.3it~ ••70 0.9.1a &.177.0.0.00.' Z~560. O... ,JS 25•• &2 ..70 0.9~7 161300.O.OOM 27&90. 0.6K ali.N'" 4.70 0.950 1••••0.0.02ZS 32.120. I. &5. 26.0•• 4.70 0••7• UO.IO.o.u.o 2d180. I •••• ao.7'~ •• 70 &.01.1 2••990.0.OZ.2 15770. 2 •..17. 27•• la •• 7.1 1.0... 2.4700.0.0"411 10000. a.v.11 Zi ••2.1 •• 70 &.06' 27.760.0.0~7 1070)0. ~ •• &2 28••• 7 •• 7;» 1.10a z....o.0.00.. 29.0. •• 1 •• 211 •• 7'11 •• 70 1.&&2 a • .,.Io.0.030. 70.0. :i.OSJ 2~••".1 4.70 1.1 • .1 2"~4.0.

0.0,",.1 5<110. !t.VOI "'0 • .1~1 ••70 1.17.:1 .101270.0.031. 5110. 0.1A., .11.&0. •• 70 1.2" .10.440.0.033& 4• .10. 7•••• 32.0". ••70 &.a311 .3&0.70•0.0307 .1920. ••1I7a 32.'01 ••10 •• a70 31 ....0•0.033. 3.30. .0.~6S » .... ..70 •• .10. ......0 •0.0131 Z050. 11.0.7 3••lIOO •• 70 •• :5•• 3aOS70•O.NO. Z.70. II.". 3 ••••~ ••10 1.3., .12....0.0.0330 2Z00. lZ.70S 3••4.a •• 70 loJa7 Uli..O.o.oa.o 2.200. 1.3...... 37.6a7 4.70 1••15 .117040.0.G~30 2530. 1•• 31. ...8 ...... 4.70 1.4.0 .130370.0.0...0 2.&0. I ..... ..."'• ..,.& ..70 1.... 3.3a700.0.0.100 1.70. &7••3' ••• 1•• •• 70 1.514 » ....0 •O.O~U 1220. 11••.100 • 2 ...... ••70 1....s .13••70•0.03•• 16.30. lZ.00. 4.s.0Iol •• 70) 1.5•• 33'500.0.0il.7 1470. II •••• ..s.61. •• '0 10='71 ~~."70.

0.0,)•• "'••0. 0.0•• 2'••2'" 3.GO 1.63a 3•••0.o.oro&.J .~70. 40."'" ...1 •••2 ..1.00 I .... .s••120....0,)&. .S70. ••••a 32.aZ.l ,).0;1 1.71. ....a..,o•0.0~'.1 .l2vO. v• .,,,. ,).J.VIo!t .1.110 1.7•• ".•••0.o.~... .1790. &1.7•• .15 ...." 3.,)0 1.7•• 3...770.0.0.... .16.0. 13.0&4 "".2", ....00 1 •• &. "'2••0.o.o••a 31.0. 1•• .113 39.511 ,).00 I.". .17...0.O.o.J II a130. 1~.1". 41.6..3 3.00 I •••• 3"7')0.0.0191 ••'0. U.017 .3..... 3.00 1.9a3 3'''00.

101

Page 112: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

102

,,,TIGUE-CRACK \oRO.T" TEn OAT"

SHCI.... Ml. UE a

••o ••ao aNCtleS .·3.009 INCtCs

Tl!'-l!."IU1U! 0 D~G8US,

'" QJII QUit III. II! , M

0.01~ ,..0. .h9.3. 2••52~ ••.10 o.ella .J0790.0.0.03 31Z60. Z.31S 2•• 76. ....0 1.020 6Z050.O.O.ZJ 21 ••0. 3 • .J.6 Z6.70. ..30 I.~• 413.90.0.0.9.;l IZ.OO. ..7.7 a7.76. ••30 1.11. 9••90.0.Oil.7 5Z10. ••••z a8.av. ..30 1.1.2 101100.0.0.13. .OSO. 7.Y.l a •• ta. ••30 1.10. 10S150.0.0.11. .1020. 41.7.1 a••so;, ••.10 I.I.J 10.U70.0.0215 .11100. ".116' 30.aao •• 30 1.laz 111170.O.O..JO. .J~O. aO.7•• 31.0'1 ...1. a.zs. 114.JO.0.0401 3-.60. IZ • .I43 3a.o• ., • • .10 1.19. 117.0.0.0~.2 11IIAO. 1.J • .t HI 32••10 ••.10 1.3a. 119.30.o.oa•• 1930. 1... , •• 33.S9a ••30 1.3... IIU'OO•0.02S0 1'.0. 1.....2 .I••3S. • • .10 1.30" 12....0.0.0"33 21.0. lS.3.3 3!O.364 •• 30 1•••n aas..o.o.oJaJ 2260. 1••0.9 36.S.' ..... a .... ' aI7940.0.oa9. 1610. 1...9.7 37.sa. ..,~ a••o. aa9HO.0.02 .... a490. 2a.0'5 .... lIIr2 ••.10 a.4'" a,a040.0.0.101 1250. 20.2.0 3•••.10 •• '0 1.US a,a..o.0.029. IZ.O. ..<lr.l " ••,.a ••'0 ..5a. I.lM30•o.ozas 9,)0. 2.40a 40.Z'. 4• .10 I ••H 13.430.o.o••v .19420. 2.196 26.'13 2.60 1.61 , 17,..0.0.0434 21.20. • 2.650 2••••• 2.60 1.6•• IVU70•0...... 10000. a.9.a a ....7. 2.60 I ••• aOS27••0••41. 10.0•• 3•• 04 30.1411 a.60 I.'•• al.'70.0 ••••.1 10.00. a.V5. .II ..... a.60 1.'6. 22.770.0.02•• 10J•• .;l•••3 32.S... Z.60 I.'" .3a770.0.02.1 .00•• .t •• " '2 ••SI 2••• I.'M a ..."o.0.0313 211&3oJ. 1.9•• ....9. Z.OO 1.... a6.VOO.•••.11.1 .0010. Z.O'. 4111.306 2.00 a.079 • •••10.oJ.03.6 a51.10. a•••• a ••••• •••0 1••11 ."040.0.O.Ia4 .2000. ......1 .. a .""0 2.00 1...6 .;10....0 •0.02'. • 000. .1.2.407 17.S"" z.oo 1.... 311040•

Page 113: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

103

rA'IGU~AA~K GAO.'" 'E" OA'A

SP&~I"." "0. 41E 4

.-0.610 INCItES _3.0Ia INCHI!S

'E.HIiATURI! 0 OIl:CiRE~.,.

Il6 Q~ 1l6ge. ~ ge 6 tt

0.OUi4 2147Cl. 2.10. a~.0'7 ..30 0.9M 524. o.0.0172 20580. .1.054 as. 0.'" 4 • .10 0.9.S 72990.0.01~4 • 1l.0. 2.37. 2li.3•• ..30 •• 002 ••170.0.oa80 lZ7ZCl. .I •••• 2~.e:tz 4 • .;10 •• ou 96.90 •0.0.75 .a870. 5.173 26.e21 4.30 I.oao .097.0.0.0495 7670. ••6•• 27•••6 ..30 ••• a,) .. 7430.0.oa57 33.0. 7.,)2a aa.,)~o ••.,,0 ••••6 .a07.0.0.00a7 .000. 7 ••0. aa•••• • • .,,0 • ••54 .21740.0.0257 31.0. 7.8a7 a9.099 ••30 ••• 7a 11.010.0.034. 4130. ••••2 a9.ltoo ••,)0 ..a.l .a90.0 •0.,)2a. a7ao. V.41a 30.IUI 4.30 •• a36 &3.770.0.02•• 2200. 10.034 "'1.061 4 • .;10 1.256 133.70.0.0.73 4530. 11.:;35 .;Ia• .J71O ..30 1.304 13...0.0.oaa6 1.10. 12.4.6 .;1.;1.01'" 4.30 1.327 14".10.,).,)3•• 29ao. 14.,)51 34.143 ..30 •• 36. 143330.0.040. .10.10. Ut.44S .J=t.:ozol 4 • .10 1.40. , ....,JO.0.oa73 1570. • '.70a 36••13 4.30 •• 43S 1.'000•0.oa7. 1.00. Ilh."'5 37.alla 4 • .JO 1••60 149.100.0.0260 la.o. 19•• aa 3••3.. ..30 1•••0 I.OHO.0.02•• .uo. 5.70a .3••570 4.30 I ••'" 15ao.o•0.03040 1260. 2.963 39.038 •• 30 1.507 1.,1340.0.oa6.1 32.ao. 1.460 a5•• 75 a.60 ••570 1••••0.0.0.7. 16illO. •• 430 25•••• 2.60 I •••• aoa.so•0.017. 134.0. 1 ••.19 26.16e 2••0 ..607 21 ••• 0.0.023. .7060. 02 ••0. 27.02S a.60 1.63. 23a970.0.04...0 .5'130. ••69. a ....16 2.6" ..... 14.ltOO •0.04.. • v.Jo. 6.116• 30.a,. Z.60 ..733 a.7Uo.0.032a .1100. .....a ;1'.0<&7 2.60 1.7.3 .,6.NO •0.01" a200. a.7a. 31.790 a ••o I. "a a6,1.~0.

o.ozaa a.oo. v •••• 3.10672 a.60 1.794 1652,10.0.0093 z.oo. 9.0aa 33••35 a.oo I .... a.7:1:1O.0.OOt46 Z.OO. 10••1. .....Ia.. a.oo 1••:11 26••,10•

ReprodUCed lrombelt available COpy.

Page 114: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

fA flGUE-CRACK IiROW'M 'I" UAU

5PICIMIN NO. 4ae 4

.-0•••4 lhe... ..a.99' INC.....

TIMP.~ATU_ 70 DECiMHI "tU IUt 11611. ~ ae l ..

0.~204 ..~oo. ~.V'7 .J.J.lt57 6.oa O.VI.J 29500.0.0140 7100. :1.&10 2••5.Jl •• 31 0.927 .,)0..0 •0.01 •• • 3000. I • .J.J.J 2••".~ 4 • .Ja 0.9.9 $~.OO.

0.00.. 6700. 0.65. 2••••0 4.3a 0.9.. .1100.O.O.J.' 471$0. a.I.I" 25._2 4.2. I.ooa ao...o.0.0'.1 27350. 3.605 a7.11I.J 4.30 1.07. 1.,)2aoo.0.0071 aoooo. 5.0.1 29.061 4 • .J0 1.15' 152aoo.0.0446 '400. 0 ••" 30.0.7 ••31 1.1•• 15'16".0.0300 5000. 7.76. .,)'.90. ••.J2 I.aa, 1•••00 •0.0010 5000. II.'.' :11 ••30 ••30 •• 26• .........0.0.76 5000. • 0.4.7 .1.$.150 •• .10 I. ,,)12 17.600•0.0447 0000. 11.040 3•• 416 ••a. 1.3.7 17MOO •0.04• .J ..600. a •• " •• .I6 • .la • •• .:U 1••07 102200 •0.0.05 3000. 2.001 35••51 4.30 1••02 1...200.0.0201 I~OO. ol•••a .J••4~U ••30 l.oa5 a••~oo.0.0009 1.7000. 1.0" 23.001 a ••• a.llI a .I~")200.

0.0.76 2.000. •• lt97 a.J.eoo a ••• 1.542 _a ••o.o.ua. a.3100. a.0.3 a••o•• a.so ..... • • .JOo.o.oao. ISOOO. 2 •••.3 25.77.3 •••0 1.611 3""340•0.06.1 a ••oo. •••a. .7.... a.so 1.67. • ••.J00•o.o~a. 6.300. 5 •••.3 •••603 a.so 1.702 .as..o.0.063. 10000. II.". 30•••7 a.50 a.'_ • .JtoMo.0.0.12 4000. ~.a.o .J2.1.'I ••4. 1.7.. .~'I_o•0.00.2 1000. ~.7'6 3a.17. a ••• 1.7" 000640.0.0~07 10000. :t.~.S 27.dZ.. 2.0.:1 • •••2 .5....0.0.0210 • 000. 1.<13• 29.3.7 a.03 1...0 .....0.0.06•• 6000. ..1.0 30.5.111 .... • ••.10 .....0 •o.oz•• .JIOO. la.Ol. 31.201' I ••a • ...0 ..77.0.0.0....1 .3".0. 1~.6.7 3a.51.,) 1••7 ••••• .70'.0.0 ..... 2000. 111.615 J ••••O I.'. lI.oa. 4'2'.0.0.0"" 1000. .7.11.33 .15.7.110 1.- 2.05. .'."0.o ••a.. 1650. •••••• 33.3.. 1 ••7 ;, ••• 7 .76190.

104

Page 115: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

""1' I GUE-CAACK GMOWT" TEST OA1'A

S~eCI.EN NO. ~EZ

..0.6.10 INCHES .-30.00. INCHES

TEMPEIlA1'UAE 70 OEoOAEES ,.

U Il~ UQ!l g, ge A III

0 ••a92 ao~o. 3lO.927 29.cJ23 6.30 0.53. .,.00.0.002lS 1100. Ilt.lt70 29.11.50 6 • .10 0.&6.1 &700.0.159' 21500. 7.7•• 32.2&. 6.30 0.126 27200.0.02J1 IViOO. 2 ••2.3 2••ilM •• ~O 0.91. .6.100.0.'0219 32250. 2.1.3 2:a•• .32 ..51 0.911 7.550.0.051. .32550. 2.793 2••135 ..51 1.019 111100.0.06.& 20000. 3.".7 27• .15.1 ..51 1.07'9 131100.0.0••• 10000. ••992 211017. ..50 1.120 1.1100•O. ,)4.2 1000. ft••O. 29.137 •• 50 1.162 1."'100•O.OZ9.l 60000. 6.560 30.00. ••50 1.197 Ila5100.0.0••• 60,)00. 7.517 31.001 ..&0 1.237 1.1100.0.0.... ,.000. a.fl6. 32.ait.1 ..50 1.2.2 10'100•0.05.3 6000. 1.700 3••.337 ••50 1.35. 17:J100.0.0&0. 5000. 7 ••9a .3••90. •••• 1 •.187 17.UOO.O.Oli.S .000. 2.656 35.205 6.50 I ...N 1.2IUO.0.03.3 110970. 0.&31 22.995 2.62 1.503 2V3070.0.023. 11.00. 0.5041 22...7 .1.60 ...04 30.670.0.0100 a!looo. 0 •• 73 2.1.10. 2.60 1.516 H9670.0.00...3 12610. 0••9. 23.302 a.60 I.U. 34liZ...0.00.0 17000. 0.616 2.3....1 2.61 1.52. 3.9.1.0.0.0063 17150. 0•• 73 23.50S a.61 1.52. 37...10.0.01.. ,34.00. 1.211 2••031 2.61 I.S,.I .10930.0.031V .17500. 2.300 2=».02\1 2.61 1.5"0 .3...30.0.05045 .10610. .....0 26.c.... 2.6a 1.6•• ••"040.0.0.57 12500. 5.26. 2 •• 06. .1.61 1.6V2 .7IlMO•0.0." 10000. 6.6" .10.2112 2.6. 1.7.11 ••1.00.O.06la 1I0ao. •• 7.1 3".139 2.61 1...1 ."'11..0.0.0••0 .500. 6 ••7. 33.7.11 .1.61 I.U7 •••0.0.0.0.1'. 3750. 0••.1. 241• .130 .1.10 1.005 .97790.o.o.nz 7.100. 7.0... 30 ••0.. .1.1. 1.901 505MO.0.0.197 .!i00. ~.2Z1 31.771 .1.1. 1.93. 509••0.O.O.3.la .1750. lit.098 3.:1..U6 2.16 1.970 51.....0.0.0407 3220. 11.. 11.6 .1•• 7.13 2.0. 2.0019 51 .... 0 •O.Ola •• 3 ••0. 20••01 .... FI.l 2.10 Z.OlO 520050.0.Oit6S 1000. •••••• .10.826 .1.10 1.926 $.11050.

105

Page 116: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

PATIGUe-'AAQK GAO.T~ T••1 DAIA

...ecl....N N4:1. UE I

.....&1 &IloCHe. .-3.000 INCtI&S

II_eR~TuAe 0 DEliRU. P

Ala llJf QAII" .. lilt! 1 III

0.0111 2.7.0. 1•• 71 2..... _.~01 0.977 :;4270.0.0273 3ol3.0. 1.4.0 2!).a51 •• :so 0••9. a.660.0.00'.1 120~0. 2.04~ 25••.16 •• .s& 1.016 986.0.0.033. 1•••0. 3 • .10. 26• .1.1 -.~I 1.04' 113630.o.oa,~ 1510. ...~. .16.7.3 4.31 1.072 122140.0.03~" .420. 1.3'1 27.3.3 4.31 1.103 120..0.0.047' 0910. 7.0•• 10.565 ••31 a.&SI 1:J7.70.0.0.1.1 4••0. 1.072 2••305 ••30 1.'09 141&30.0.0.1' 'ClIO. V.S.3 30.5.. 4 • .:s. a.a37 147740.0.0.1' ~770. aO.4.a 31.521 4.30 1.27. ISl5a o.o.o.a. 4020. la.2.0 32.73. ••30 a.:u. a11530.0.0••9 3510. 12.01. 34.01. 4.30 1.362 159.0.o.oalv 2700. II ..... ;l5.04S 4.3t' ,.;3.5 161750.0.031. 2700. IZ.203 :S6.102 4.3· 1.4Z0 1••••0.o.o.:&a. Z150. 1... 1.1 37.0.7 4.3l- 1 ••55 a••700.0.011. ZOOo. la.aoo :sa.167 4.30 I •••• 1••700.O.OH. &SOO. 5.1Z. 3a.&56 4.30 a.... &70200.0.oa3. loOO. a.v'l 3a.51a 4.30 1.6.3 ,70700.0.0••7 210.. 0. &.sa4 a...... 2.60 a.535 1• .1»0.0.0473 13.ao. 2.00. Z••3.7 .1.60 1.014 .1.57.0•0.0307 Z1&30. Z.70a 27.771 2 ••0 1.6S0 .1....0.0.060. aoo.o. 3 ••0. z••a36 .1••0 1.710 1....0 •0.0••• &3...0. 6 •• a. ~.4S. 2.00 1.7.. 300770.0.030& :soao. ••••• 33 ••3. 1.60 I ••09 30'7ao•o.oa•• as&o. ...... 3••~'. 2.00 &••ao H ....O.0..... 1900. 9 ••1. 31••31 1 ••0 l.a5a. :soaa.o.O.IU:SO 900. a.eoa. 3•••"7 a.60 I ••S. H."O.0.0••• la090. li••71 a•••• ' .1.00 1••0lt :S20a ...0.0&77 4':&s0. lI.ao. 3"0.SI0 .1.0,) I ••'" :sa6no•O.OlZ~ • 000. r••101 17..... 2.00 I •••• HltUO.

106

Page 117: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

"A'IWI-C""Cll INIO.'". '.IT DATA

'~.C'M'" MD. .11 •

"0.6' 0 IIIICNII ..,.Oll INCMC.

' ......AT".. -I' 0•••1 P

g,II" UDII! U .. • It

0.0... a0430. 1.0•• as.a., 4.3D O.'M 003.0.0.01 .. 111.0. 1 • .1•• al.lo.. 4.30 1.01. 10•••0.0.011' 112.10. I.'~O 16.1.' 4.30 100.1 .1.1710.0 ...... 11 ••0. I •••• 17.0." 4.3.1 100" ,.taftO.0.011. U.100. ..,.. a? .., 4.30 1.09. 1....0.0.0184 11170. I •••• a7.71', ••30 ioU. .a".ao.0.0.1.. 16.ao. ....,. .a• .J7. 4• .:1. 1.1•• 14......0 •••7. 11070. 3.'0' a'.NO ..- I.ln 1•••'0.•••301 '.00. ••••• a•••o,. ..30 I •••" aOllflO.0.0••' 12000. •• 1•• .I, ..... ..- ,.... a.'9'••0.0662 .6.0. 8.108 :u.o•• •••• 10.1.11 .I"HO.o.o.a. JOOO. ...070 .13.900 4 • .)0 103.1 a30••••0.oa1.J .10110. I~.'I' 3•• ''';£ 4.:10 ..3•.1 a;l;l11l0.0.03aa 3060. 11.33' ....7". ••..a. 1.4" a.1.....o.O.OJlt a,.o. •.1.". .11••"6 4 • .)0 a ••• ' 13"4.10•0.0400 .1000. 14••" .s1.,,4. 4._ I .... I.au••o.oa.. 1"10. ,...., " •• 3_a ••30 &••a4 •••••••0.017' 1000. I'.'''' .O.oal ••.:ao a.ua •••1•••0.0••• 1000. .,.IU .0.... • • .10 ,.... ••al.8.o.oalo 1000. a •••o .0..... ..... ..••a I.,....0.0'11 aooll. ,.00. 41.a•• ..30 '."0 a••••o.0.0.11.1 • '.10. I .... ..,..., a.70 I.U" le14:aI.O.O.JIO 1••.10. a.a.. a ••6'. ..70 ,.... 310960.0.02.. 11000. a•••• a ••••~ a.70 ..... II&'MO.0.0~0" 10000. .I ••• ' 30 ...... a.70 a.,.~ .I~I"O.

0.oa07 • 000. 1t.46.. ", •..,.&. a.70 ,.,.. """'0•O.O~'O SIiOO. 7••1. "LO•• a.? I.Y". .14...0.O.OJII :1000. ao ..... .14.00. a.'. 1.,," .14,....0.0.... ao~o. 'a•••• " •• 00. 10"0 1.111' M""•.0.0'01 aooo. 1..... H ••I. a.70 .....1 ~.I"..O.

0.0'" aaao. I'•••• .:I,• ..,. a.70 ..." .4oaO.O.OI:S.. 1~0. ' •••~l ~••o." 1.70 I ....,. .1~.a70.

0.013a '60. a, •• ,. "...... a.?o 1.9.a ~1J'.30.

0.01 ... ..0. aO.911 • •• 1.. a.... I.VJ. ~•••O.0.0111 .10. 1•• 141 4,.se" 2.6" I .... .7.00.

ReprodUCed fromhesl .v.il.hle COpy.

107

Page 118: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

._I.GUI-CMACK GRU~J" JeSI DAWA

.IIec ••e. -.J. 4.1: ~

••0 ••'1 INC... _:S.OO'• • He.....

le_...UURE -50 DEaH• •

116 !Ill Q6QII II!' ge 6 II

0.'U41 16•• 0. a• .l~. a •• o»~ •• ;so le02S 49900.0.0.'1' aal90. a.it.a a••• _ .."JO ••0.,) '<&690.0.01•• 213.0. •• 904 a6.707 •• .JO 1.07' ••oeO.O.OU. ••• 00. 2.0•• 2'.5•• • • .JO I.UO IIZIaIO •0.0.... '740. .l.603 a ••400 • • .J. 1.137 .1£••••0.0.17. .0410. ...., a •••• r ••:t. a.17. l.:Ia..)~o.

G.,U06 6030. •• 7.0 a9••0. •• .J. ..209 L.JtI~••G.O~•• • ~ao. ...." .lo.u• 4 • .J. a.a.J.J l.a.70•o.oaoa ".20. ..,.. 3a••S9 •• .JO 1.2.7 1••090.D......? :tUO. 7 • .J06 ;S•• rr a ••.:10 a.zllO I."'UO.0.0240 ,).JOO. '.6'" 32•••• •• :to a.:to. a52'OO.0.0;,... ••.JO. ...laaa ,).J •• a. 4 • .10 1.3.0 157U••G...ao ".30. 'II.S.9 ;S4.,06 ..3., I • .l1. .616«00.o.oa,. .JOOO. ao.,a" ~•••70 4.:t0 1••09 .......0.03•• ,)000. • •• '11.4 :s•••o, ..3.J I •••a .6'''0.o.u•• 2.00. a...... 3/.0•• ..<&0 ' ••'3 .70a60.o.oa.. .000. ao.o•• 3....a 4.;S0 a.4.' .7& ••0.0.02.4 .... 0. .I.a,. .J..... ..u 1.4." '71.'0•0.009. 530. a•••• 3 •• 9.. • • .;so ••5U .73....0.010? .7.Jao. O.VO. 014.'<&.1 z ••o l.sa. .vOtalO.0.00" ,0.SO. 1••a.1 01...... 2.60 ••6.S ..77"'.0.04 ... 1....0. •hZ•• z7 ....a a ••• a.D• a9a900.0.04ao a"..Ch .J.030 ...... a .... a."o• :1&0960.0.00.19. aZlt.o. ••ou ;'lea7. a ••• l.'~ 323sa••0.0... Gaao. ... ,. ;,a• .103 2••' •• 70. :124163••0.001.. ~.10. aa ..... .1.Jd"~ a.ftO ••OOJ! "",...0.0.0.11. 2••0. ••53' , •• 0•• 2••0 a.... .1.1.....o.u,,, ~1£00. ••"00 ........ I ••' ...... 3.1...0.0.01•• "1l0. •.. r. "".134 I ••' I .... 33'••0.o.02ao 1&100. •••0.1 1'9.1•• ••00 1.91. "'''710.0.0." ••00. •••• a7 016•• '0 P••' a ••a7 .....JIO.

108

Page 119: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

109

fAr IGUI-CAACK GAO.r" raST o"r"

SP,eCIMeN HU• .I~ a

..o.aal ....C..s _~.OIS INCHES

TeMPERATUIlE -so DE....U. P

QA lUI !WIlli IH5 ge 6 III

0.0109 4.1470. 0.57. .14.:0.37 •• ;'0 0.....0 127420.0.0211 4Ieo.O. 0.793 24.94. 4 • .30 a.oa.3 ae.",aoo.0.03•• .0550. 1.21. .15.5&. ..30 1.040 201lb50.o.oaos 22400. l.a.7 26.123 • • .30 le075 232050•0.041. 21200. .1.10. .16.67. 4.30 a.11I 25.3250.0.03.7 10010. 2.73. ol7.e.3. 4.30 1.I.a 20'1200.0.033. 10000. 2.~.6 20.311 ••30 a.17. 279260.0.0.307 12030. 3.3.7 29.20a ••30 1.21. ol.IZVO.0.03•• 9210. 3 •••• 30.017 ..30 1 • .1•• 300500.0.03.15 10430. •• 564 311.0.:- ••30 1.287 3109.0 •0.031a oliO. 5 • .127 .31•••• • • .10 1.315 3170-0 •0.029a .420. 5.9al 32.5113 •• .30 1.330 321.aO•0.0190 J:Oli O. ••.3~1 :l!.3.I'.I<t •• ;'0 1.362 .125010.0.02310 .14.0. .... 13 JoS••47 ••.10 1 • .384 ~~••5'.0.0.140 3.90. 7.2.2.1 .1••57. •• 30 1••07 331,,",0.0.033. 4.10. ••019 35.0107 ••.30 1••45 336750•0.04ZIi .0.10. 7."9a 37.1".1 4.311 I •••• 341370.0.02.3 3100. ••0.32 .18.122 ••30 1 ••09 3•••70•0.0~01 31.0. •• 09. 39.31. 4.30 1.5.0 347610 •0.(1'01 25.0. ;'.11. 39 •.331 ••30 ".41 3.0190.0.0.1. 2••0. ,.IS. 39.7M ..30 1.551 3.30311.0.01.0 00000. 1.29.1 .15.547 z.ao 1.009 413030 •0.0404 261.0. 1•••1 2..634 2.60 1.647 • 39170.0.0169 10.10. ~.a60 27.239 .1.60 1.607 .4",seO.0.0.1•• 11.150. .1•••7 28.0". .1.60 1.693 ..031t30.

Page 120: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

PA"GU~-CRAGK GRO.'" '.ST DA'A

....c:'••N HU• • 1& 7

"0.". ...e.... .·~.'II INC ...

T~....ERA'UII. 70 OEGRaS "QA lHf UUIII Ill' lie 1 ~

0.0000 5••0. 0.7'~ a••10. • •..t. 0.9.10 .&6.0.0.0079 19330. 1.6a3 a ••a"" ..30 0.9•• 60970.0.009. 1.00. 0.61. 2.- ••0..t ..~O 0.'~6 e9550.0.0110 '900. 0.0.0 2••••• • ..30 0.961 '7610.0.0019 &.070. 11.6'. a••6"'. ..30 0."3 97.00.0.001. 9000. 0.'00 2•• ' •• ••30 0.91. 101000.0.00'0 .0.0. 0.7.9 a....' ..30 0 •••3 110••0.0.01.3 alfooo. 1.299 a5.131 •• 30 0.9•• 135000.0.oa7. 16111ao. 2.150 .0.59. ••.30 l.oa3 a=l&600.o.oau 105ao. 2 ••7. a••o.. ..30 a...7 I.auo.0.0;'0. 9000. ..t.,a. a ••s •• ..30 1.0'. a7laao.0.0307 ' ••0. ••••3 17.232 ..30 1.10• a 7.700.0.030. 7000. la.dO' a7 ••93 •• 30 &.a3. a.:t700.0.OZ73 6660. e.717 2••5dO •• 30 1.&65 a901.0.0.OZ9. .000. 7.766 oZ••a., ..30 &.&.3 aV6&20.0.03aa 3600. 4 ••54 2'.~.0 •• 30 l.aa3 a'7020.o.oa•• .a.t4 O. 9 •••3 30.740 ••30 &.&=1& aOI060•0.043a ."0. 1I.1l.7 3a •••• •• 30 l.a9. aOliaao.0.0231 a••o. &&•••• 311.... ..30 a.3a. a06..0.D.oa6. ao.o. &••a •• 33.&.' ••30 1.3•• a09000.D.Ol.a &070. l:i.&•• ~.7'-I ..30 1.35' a10170.0.01.0 1070. '0••00 3••a.0 4.30 1.375 all &.0.D.oa.~ ,570. '7.6" ~.'05 ..30 a ••03 aI2710.0.01.. 1000. a••S57 3S.71a ..30 , ••al la37ao.0.0204 \NIO. a•••o, 36•.1ao 4.30 ,..... 21 ••70.0.0&32 "0. 1••••3 3••••• ••30 I •••• al=tUO.D.oa.. MO. a.3D. ~.'7. ..30 I •••• .&0370.0.021' .50. I.asa 37.3" .. 30 a...7 la 7a.0..0.02a4 • 0000. 0.9.& a3.64. 2.60 a.S,5 a57UO •••oa3. 3UIO. 0 ••Z2 a ••3za 1.0. a.... a..no•0.033V 2641 •• 1.0•• a•••a 1.60 I.'" ;la ...o.0.0106 19.ao. l.a.9 as.5U 1••0 I .... U3..0.o.ouo 113ao. a.17. Z6.1.. 2.60 1.613 3a'j£70.o.oa•• 1.510. 3.3'. 26••al 1.60 1.63. 3637".o.oa•• luao. ...., a •• o.o a.foO '.0". 37.900.O.Oelilt 6500. S.liO. a•• 031O a.... 1.10. 3ltl.OO.0.""." 5500. e.~5. 30.ao. a ••• a.7..tO 30.900.o.o.,a 30.0. 11.3'1 31.lla a••• a.763 ..••900.D.oao5 2000. 9.aa. 31 •••" a.60 a.771 Ba900.o.oa•• 200u. aa•••• 31.aa. I ••' 1.1•• 393900.0.0179 1300. ' ••91. n.o.. a 2 ••0 1••06 395.00.••0100 13'0• 17.0•• 33 ••7. a ••o a •••• 3....0.

110

Page 121: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

111

FAJ.GU.-eRACK GRUf'" 'EI' OA'"

I~ECI_~H hOe ••• ~

..0.598 IHC~S • ·~.OOI lNCI1I: •

,.,.,..IlI"JURe 70 DEanS "lit ga lUlIlII Q" lie " III

0.02e.... 10500. :..a 09 Z5.e.J7 ••~O O••,n J.t500.O.OJl.9 a.OGG. 4.!o.J 26.16 ... 4.JO I.GIO 47500.CI.0:.55 10000. e..JII a7.IUIl ••JiO 1.062 It'500.4'.OJlOO 6000. a.11I a,. 946 •• 28 1.102 oJ500.0.0••• .000. 9.113 21••2. 4 • .10 1.IJl5 e.7500.O.oall JOOO. 10.0)4' 29.350 4.a. •• 163 70)500.0.0323 3000. u.u .. 30• .J.t. 4.30 a.I.7 7.1500.0.oa19 .1000. .1.797 31.07. 4.<f. a.ail' 7••00.0.03.. 3000. 13.363 32.04. •• 211 l.a66 79500.o.OJl'" a500. 15.163 .I.J.OI~ •• .so a • .Joo .2000•0.027. 2000. ao.,•• .1.....0 4.3it a • .s.U ..000.0.OJl73 aooo. 111.412 35.080 •• 30 1.3co5 ••000.0.03•• 2000. 12.110 .sco •.s:.co ••.10 1••0. ...000.0.009. ~OO. la.993 J6• .:I2. ..30 1•• 0.. ..500.0.00.3 500. • ...33 3••6.1~ ••32 1•• 01t .",000.0.0109 50)00. 1.072 21.711 2.sa 1••2" 9"000.0.0200 1••00. a.lo. ~2.I26 2.52 I •••• 10.. MO.0.00•• aoooo. 0.".. 22.5.1. a.52 I .... 12...0.0.00.0 20000. o ....a a2 •••• .I .... 1••72 1....00.0.00" aoooo. o••a. 11••5. a.50 1••77 1....00.0.006. aoooo. 0 •••• 2ot••,).J a.50 I .... 1...600.0.000" • 000. 0.S70 22.77:. 2.S0 a••O 197500.0.0307 • 0010. a.,•• 23 ..1&0 a.roo 1••a7 a.7roI0.0.03.5 aoooo. a ••oa a ••co"o 2.50 10563 I.'IUO.0.0001 aoooo. ...00. 026.5.0 2.50 1.6.10 211'S.0.0.0".0 10000. :...JI a7.7"~ Ol••G 1.070 a"7SI0.O.GOG. 10000. ,.:." a•••7Z a~.o 1.730 J07S.0.~.0.7. 2000. '1.530 30.a91 2.50 1.7.2 3091UO.0.0399 .000. IG.703 3 ••~a.. 2 ••0 '.7111 31"'''0.0.041. .0.:10. .... 20 3 ••0 ... .1.50 1.8.11 317.10.0.05•• 3000. • ••Z2. 31»069.. .1.50 I .... .320SI0.o.O.2a. 30.,0. II • .:112 JlO.G'" 2.00 1••00 n ...lo.0.022. 3000. 11.700 JlI.5.... 2.00 I ...... .. a6.10.0.0.. 09 '000. 1•• 1•• ..3.0.7 2.00 I .... n ..... o.o.oao. I~OO. 1••72. ;J.:J ....&!' I.~. 1.1t•• 3..10.0.0.0254 15011. ~••5.17 33.3•• 1.17 a.012 33a•• O.

Reproduced frombest availabl. copy.

Page 122: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

IlZ

PAI.GU!-(RACK GROW'" ' ••T UAIA

~P!C.M!N NO••ae ~

1180.,a6 .JlCHe. _a.tlvo .Ile...TcMPeIiA,uae. -.0 DaliNa•• P

.a U 'lARD .- Q£ 6 til

0.0109 1••00. z ••a. ~•• 70' ~.z.. 0.91. 5aa10.0.0••0 15060. z •• r. a ••ao~ 5.allo 0.94.1 .,z.o.O.O'~~ 11.00. 3 •••• a•• 269 S.Z5 1.00. 95~.0.

0.030. '.10. 3 •••1 a6.'010 5.ZS 1.0as 101aDO.0.0350 10000. ••••• zr•••a s.a5 ..OM •• aooo•0.03•• 02.0. S.D•• a ••3•• 5.ZS 1•• 01 lalO6O.0.0.06 ••.3ro. • •••5 a9.,.r ••ZS 1.16a 13a.30.0.0606 6rao. ..930 .Jo.a.8 5.110 a.a•• 1.19160•0.03a" ..10. 7.rr. ,11.998 ••a. I •••" I••ao.0.03.0 .MO. 0.03a ..~.ooo ..as l.a.3 1.9370.0.03"1 • .Iao. 9 ••33 3•• 0." s.as 1.:a&0 15....0.0 ....9 .3.0. 10.800 .....6. S.15 1.3•• llao.OrO.0.03•• 3••0. l~.ZO' 36.'." 5.as 1••0.. 1611020.o.oasl 2500. 111o.19. ..' .... 1 s.a5 1..... 1••020.0.0239 • 3.0. 13.357 30.9ol. s.as • ...3 1.....'0.0.033" 23ltO. ' ••3. .. ••03a s.a5 ••••• 167,ao.0.0••• ••70. a.rrl ~..~... 5."S ••• '9 a...II90 •0.00'. .0"50. • •• 01 a..... ~.O.J a.S$4 10.., ..0.o.O.1a.l • 0.1. D. ••••• ali••8' 3••3 lesr. , ....0 •0.03.0 a.ooo. a • .I,;I, 2'.~~" 3.03 a ••17 arS"D.0.0396 20000. .1•••• ar.9•• :lea.. 1.66" 11'...0 •0.0.53 ••oro. a.o•• a ••rvo .1.0.1 I.,az 3.0120.0.06•• ..l»o. s •• u ~I.~". .J.o~ •• 7 • .., 3a0&2••o.or•• .0.0•• ••••• ....a71 3.0.1 1••"9 3a.ao.0.0600 .0000. S.,.S .17.89. 3.0.1 1••99 33ltaO.0.0401 ...00. It.ara .0 •• 7. 3.0.1 • • ..,• .1 .I••.a.lIO.

Page 123: Relation of toughness test values to fatigue cracking in ...

~A' I lOVE-CRACK liAQ.'" rl!ST UArA

~P~CI"I!" ..C. 6a& •

e·0.7;'0 INc:t4&a ••3.001 IIolC~S

le:"..£IlAfUU -50 D£4.iMI!I!S ~

IU lib 116ga ~ l2!! 6 aO.Ul.", I~~~O. ol ....7 2!>.o~ol 5.Z!> 0.9.n OZZOO.0:040S 1.100. .3.,29. 26.2:'5 S.2S 1.01. 106;'00.0.')579 1.260. • ••~2 27.19.1 5.2.3 1.066 I<tO!tCoO.0.()34l1 77.0. •• ;f62 28.001 5.20$ 1.10. 121300.o.oaiol 0••0. S.70S 28.755 5.Zo$ 1.137 13.740.0.0.3•• :t030. ...~26 29.50a 5.23 1.160 140370.0.01 •• ,'lAO. 7.119 30.123 5.Z.3 1.104 14.ZZ0.0.0543 67.0. •• IU7 31.4'0 5.2.3 1.246 150)960.0.0376 3VVO. 9.723 3a••l. 5.2.. l.allO 1~4950.

0.0260 30Z0. 10.00. 33• .311 5.23 1.31a IS7970.0.Oill41 2000. 11.4107 33.\oOo$S 5.Z3 1.33,'J 15'11'1110.0.0230 2~0~. 12• .149 34.6. L S.23 1.35. 101970.O.OZ•• 2000. 13.599 ..5 ••0l> '-.2,j l.o$al 163970.0.IlZ8a 2,)00. 1•• 8a. 3e-.375 S.23 1••09 le-lIV70.0.0300 ",000. 1•• 5•• 37.651 ~.2~ 1 •••• I C. 7 III O.0.034. aooo. 3•• 14 37.6.1 5.a,'J 1.4.5 lltV970.D.oaN 1340. 1••5a 38.124 5.2.1 1••59 171310.0.0:167 • ,UO. 1.394 23.677 3.03 1.529 219130•O.O,'J•• ....10. 1.911 24.090 .1.03 1.5.1 25.7.0.0.0.19 ao• .3o. a.614 20.2.17 3.0.1 1.626 .l75370.0.04Z0 15640. .1.",00 27.11"0 .1.0.1 1.670 291010.0.031.., 6470. 1hZI. 28••0' .J.03 1.695 2V7••0.0.0.31.1 11110. 7.0.0 a" • .J44 3.03 1.7;t2 30Zft90.o.oz•• 4000. 9.37. 30•• 18 .1.0.1 1.751 3065VO.O.OZ" 3000. 6.7Da 31.779 ...0.3 1.70tl 30",5",0.0.0.310 aOJo. C..".I 32.27. 3.0.1 1.797 .n 1590.0.0.122 .lUD. 5.0.5 ..2.S..,0 :t.D") 1 ••0. 31.1620.0.11113 1.150. 2 ••49 22.7... Z.D3 l.a3. 32,nD.0.OID4 la.80. •••.12 2.3./11 Z.O..l l.a6. 340Z50•0.0231 7D70. 6.16a 30.9..,. 2.5.1 1.89' 347320.D.O..;'\; ....0. ~ • .z10 ,J,j ••U· ~ 2.5. l.la.Z 3llo.210.D.".4a 3500. 11.561 35.20)'1 z.a. 1.9". 35771 o.

Reproduced 'rolllbesl _venable copy.

113


Recommended