高级检索

    周为群, 宋超骅, 吴东棣. 对金属材料高温缺口持久试验的研究[J]. 华东理工大学学报(自然科学版), 1986, (2).
    引用本文: 周为群, 宋超骅, 吴东棣. 对金属材料高温缺口持久试验的研究[J]. 华东理工大学学报(自然科学版), 1986, (2).
    A study on the creep rupture testing of notched specimens[J]. Journal of East China University of Science and Technology, 1986, (2).
    Citation: A study on the creep rupture testing of notched specimens[J]. Journal of East China University of Science and Technology, 1986, (2).

    对金属材料高温缺口持久试验的研究

    A study on the creep rupture testing of notched specimens

    • 摘要: 为进一步弄清缺口持久断裂的机理,作者采用持久试验,金相分析、有限元计算相结合的方法进行研究,修正了传统的概念。1.各国标准都以棒状缺口试样持久试验的结果来衡量材料的高温性能,传统上认为是反映材料的“缺口敏感性”。研究表明,标准缺口持久试验的实质是反映材料在多向应力作用下的抗主裂纹萌生与扩展的能力。2.各国标准都以理论应力集中系数K_t作为确定试样几何参数的主要依据。对K_t的物理意义,传统上都按缺口处轴向应力的最高值与平均值之比来理解。研究表明,实际的应力集中系数远较K_t值小,K_t实质上是反映了缺口拘束度和应力三向性的高低。3.各国标准都只用棒状缺口试样进行试验,而美国标准ASTME 292-69除棒状外还允许采用板状缺口试样。研究表明,棒状和板状缺口试样的断裂形式及应力应变再分布都不同:K_t值相同或相近的两种试样,持久寿命可能相差达数十倍之多。因此,应特别注意这两种试样各自适用的场合。故传统上一律采用棒状缺口试样的做法是不妥的。

       

      Abstract: The creep rupture testing of notched specimens is examined in a new light through the combined study involving creep rupture tests, metallographic observations and finite element computation. The following concepts are re-examined and revised:1. Notched creep rupture testing methods have been specified in the Standards of many countries. This test is traditionally thought of as an evaluation of the "notch sensitivitsy" of materials working in creep range. Our study points out that this test actually reflects the ability of material to resist creep crack initiation and propagation under multiaxial stress state.2. The theoretical stress concentration factor K_t is the primary factor in defining the geometric parameters of standard specimens. This study points out that the actual stress concentration in the specimen is much lower than that indicated by K_t. In fact, K_t reflects the degree of notch constraint and stress multiaxiality in the specimen rather than the initial stress concentration.3. In the Standards of many countries only cylindrical notched specimens are adopted; whereas in ASTM E 292-69, both cylindrical and flat-plate specimens are allowed. Our study points out that those two types of specimens are quite different from each other in many aspects. Thus, it is not desirable to use only cylindrical specimens for all cases, in some cases the flat-plate specimen may be closer to the service condition.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回