1.1 This test method describes the method for testing fatigue-sharpened, semi-elliptically shaped surface cracks in rectangular flat panels subjected to monotonically increasing tension or bending. Tests quantify the crack-tip conditions at initiation of stable crack extension or immediate unstable crack extension. 1.2 This test method applies to the testing of metallic materials not limited by strength, thickness, or toughness. Materials are assumed to be essentially homogeneous and free of residual stress. Tests may be conducted at any appropriate temperature. The effects of environmental factors and sustained or cyclic loads are not addressed in this test method. 1.3 This test method describes all necessary details for the user to test successfully for the initiation of crack extension in surface crack test specimens. Specific requirements and recommendations are provided for test equipment, instrumentation, test specimen design, and test procedures. 1.4 Tests of surface-cracked, laboratory-scale specimens as described in this test method may provide a more accurate understanding of full-scale structural performance in the presence of surface cracks. The provided recommendations help to assure test methods and data are applicable to the intended purpose. 1.5 This test method prescribes a consistent methodology for test and analysis of surface cracks for research purposes and to assist in structural assessments. The methods described here utse a constraint-based framework to evaluate the fracture behavior of surface cracks. 1.5.1 Discussion-Constraint-based framework. In the context of this test method, constraint is used as a descriptor of the three-dimensional stress and strain fields in the near vicinity of the crack tip, where material contractions as a result of Poissons ratio may be suppressed and therefore produce an elevated, tensile stress state. See further discussions in the Terminology and Significance and Use. When a parameter describing this stress state, or constraint, is used with the standard measure of crack-tip stress amplitude (K or J), the resulting two-parameter characterization broadens the ability of fracture mechanics to predict accurately the response of a crack under a wider range of loading. The two-parameter methodology produces a more complete description of the crack-tip conditions at the initiation of crack extension. The effects of constraint on measured fracture toughness are material dependent and are governed by the effects of crack-tip stress-strain state on the micromechanical failure processes specific to the material. Surface crack tests conducted with this test method can help to quantify the material sensitivity to constraint effects and establish the degree to which the material toughness correlates with a constraint- based fracture characterization. 1.6 This test method provides a quantitative framework to categorize test specimen conditions into one of three regimes: (I) a linear-elastic regime, (II) an elastic-plastic regime, or (III) a field-collapse regime. Based on this categorization, analysis techniques and guidelines are provided to determine an applicable crack-tip parameter for the linear-elastic regime (K or J) or the elastic-plastic regime (J) and an associated constraint parameter selected by the user. Recommendations are provided to assess the test data in the context of a toughness-constraint locus. The user is directed to other resources for evaluation of the test specimen in the field-collapse regime when extensive plastic deformation in the specimen eliminates the identifiable crack-front fields of fracture mechanics. 1.7 The specimen design and test procedures described in this test method may be applied to the evaluation of surface cracks in welds; however, the methods described in this test method to analyze test measurements may not be applicable. Weld fractures generally have complicating features beyond the scope of data analysis in this test method, including the effects of residual stress, microstructural variability, and non-uniform strength. These effects will influence test results and shall be considered in the interpretation of measured quantities. 1.8 This test method does not prohibit testing surface cracks in materials that fail by a cleavage fracture mechanism, but the analysis of such fracture test results is beyond the scope of this test method because of the highly stochastic nature of cleavage fracture. A methodology for evaluation of cleavage fracture toughness in ferritic steels over the ductile-to-brittle region using C(T) and SE(B) specimens can be found in Test method E1921. 1.9 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in brackets are for information only. 1.10 This test method may involve hazardous materials, operations, and equipment. This standard does not purport to address all of the safety problems associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the users of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
No standard exists for surface crack testing that identifies initiation toughness and allows for constraint effects in the interpretation of results. This new test method is primarily targeted at the pressure vessel community in the government and industrial sectors.
Keywordscrack initiation; crack mouth opening displacement; CMOD; constraint; deformation limit; Kdominance; J-integral; J-dominance; elastic-plastic regime; length scale; one-parameter fracture; field-collapse regime; linear-elastic regime; stable crack extension; stress intensity factor; T-stress; two-parameter fracture; unstable crack extension
The title and scope are in draft form and are under development within this ASTM Committee.Back to Top
Ballot Item Approved as E2899-2013 and Pending Publication