2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2008.02.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Creep–fatigue–oxidation interactions in a 9Cr–1Mo martensitic steel. Part III: Lifetime prediction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
1
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 67 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
0
33
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In this case, the fatigue life in vacuum was longer than that in air (1 -2 × 10 4 cycles in air and 4 × 10 4 cycles in vacuum at Δε t = 0.5 %, 3 -4 × 10 3 cycles in air and 1 -2 × 10 4 cycles in vacuum at Δε t = 0.7 %), which was explained by the lower crack propagation rate in vacuum than in air due to (almost) no oxidation effects. The fact that the fatigue life in air was longer than in vacuum in the present study was opposite phenomena against the fatigue life reduction in those previous reports, which was generally explained by the oxidation-enhanced fatigue crack initiation and propagation mechanism [15][16][17][18]20]. On the other hand, based on the fact that the difference in the fatigue life of the RB-7 specimen between in air and in vacuum was not so large, which did not exceed the scatter range of a factor of 2 of the regression curve of the room temperature test shown in Fig.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 79%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In this case, the fatigue life in vacuum was longer than that in air (1 -2 × 10 4 cycles in air and 4 × 10 4 cycles in vacuum at Δε t = 0.5 %, 3 -4 × 10 3 cycles in air and 1 -2 × 10 4 cycles in vacuum at Δε t = 0.7 %), which was explained by the lower crack propagation rate in vacuum than in air due to (almost) no oxidation effects. The fact that the fatigue life in air was longer than in vacuum in the present study was opposite phenomena against the fatigue life reduction in those previous reports, which was generally explained by the oxidation-enhanced fatigue crack initiation and propagation mechanism [15][16][17][18]20]. On the other hand, based on the fact that the difference in the fatigue life of the RB-7 specimen between in air and in vacuum was not so large, which did not exceed the scatter range of a factor of 2 of the regression curve of the room temperature test shown in Fig.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 79%
“…3. However, according to the previous reports [15][16][17][18][19], the fatigue life of the 9-12Cr martensitic steels obtained in vacuum was longer than that Fig. 3 Relationship between total strain range (Δε t ) and number of cycles to failure (N f ) of RB-1 specimen tested at R.T. in air [1] and tested at 550…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 77%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Totemeier et al [20] defined failure as a further 20% reduction in stress ratio from the point of crack initiation for INCONEL617; Fournier et al [21] defined the loss of 50% of the maximum stress as the fatigue lifetime for P91 steel; Whereas, Shankar et al [22] took the cycle number corresponding to a drop of 20% from the half-life stress as fatigue life for P91steel. In order to appropriately define the failure criterion of P92 steel, a new life end criterion was adopted, as described in Figure 1 (b).…”
Section: Analysis Of Data and Parameter Definitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In such circumstances, mean stress changes are not limited by reverse plasticity effects. Certain steels can exhibit lower cyclic/hold test endurances due to compressive hold times but this is more typically due to crack initiation in consequential surface oxide layers during subsequent transients into tension [14]. The contribution of oxidation should also be considered for Ni based superalloys as growing oxide layers can provide also a further source of crack initiation sites.…”
Section: Cyclic/hold Test Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%