ASME STP-NU-041-2011 UPDATE AND IMPROVE SUBSECTION NH C ALTERNATIVE SIMPLIFIED CREEP-FATIGUE DESIGN METHODS《更新和改进分段NH 可替代简化的蠕变疲劳设计方法》.pdf

《ASME STP-NU-041-2011 UPDATE AND IMPROVE SUBSECTION NH C ALTERNATIVE SIMPLIFIED CREEP-FATIGUE DESIGN METHODS《更新和改进分段NH 可替代简化的蠕变疲劳设计方法》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ASME STP-NU-041-2011 UPDATE AND IMPROVE SUBSECTION NH C ALTERNATIVE SIMPLIFIED CREEP-FATIGUE DESIGN METHODS《更新和改进分段NH 可替代简化的蠕变疲劳设计方法》.pdf（125页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、 STP-NU-041 UPDATE AND IMPROVE SUBSECTION NH ALTERNATIVE SIMPLIFIED CREEP-FATIGUE DESIGN METHODS Prepared by: Tai Asayama Japan Atomic Energy Agency Date of Issuance: March 31, 2011 This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the ASME Standards

2、 Technology, LLC (ASME ST-LLC). This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or re

3、sponsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer

4、or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

5、 Neither ASME, ASME ST-LLC, the author nor others involved in the preparation or review of this report, nor any of their respective employees, members or persons acting on their behalf, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, complet

6、eness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe upon privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer or otherwise does not necessarily

7、 constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favoring by ASME ST-LLC or others involved in the preparation or review of this report, or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of the authors, contributors and reviewers of the report expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of

8、ASME ST-LLC or others involved in the preparation or review of this report, or any agency thereof. ASME ST-LLC does not take any position with respect to the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any items mentioned in this document, and does not undertake to insure anyone utiliz

9、ing a publication against liability for infringement of any applicable Letters Patent, nor assumes any such liability. Users of a publication are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk of infringement of such rights, is entirely their own respons

10、ibility. Participation by federal agency representative(s) or person(s) affiliated with industry is not to be interpreted as government or industry endorsement of this publication. ASME is the registered trademark of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. No part of this document may be repro

11、duced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. ASME Standards Technology, LLC Three Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990 ISBN No. 978-0-7918-3364-3 Copyright 2011 by ASME Standards Technology, LLC All Rights Reserved Alternat

12、ive Simplified Creep-Fatigue Design Methods STP-NU-041 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword x Executive Summary xi 1 INTRODUCTION . 1 2 PREREQUISITES FOR EVALUATION 2 2.1 Evaluated Data 2 2.2 Representation of Material Properties . 2 2.3 Prediction Using Time Fraction Rule 2 3 OUTLINE AND PREDICTABILITY O

13、F NEWLY PROPOSED CREEP-FATIGUE EVALUATION METHODS . 7 3.1 Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method . 7 3.2 Strain Range Separation Method . 25 3.3 Approach for Pressure Vessel Applications 42 3.4 Hybrid Method of Time Fraction and Ductility Exhaustion . 58 3.5 Simplified Model Test Approach 72 4 POTENTI

14、AL TO DEPLOYING THE METHODS INVESTIGATED TO ASME-NH 79 4.1 Evaluation of Creep-Fatigue Life Predictability of the Methods Investigated in Short-Term and Long-Term Regions 79 4.2 Evaluation of Basic Potential of the Methods Investigated . 98 4.3 Evaluation of Extendibility of the Methods Investigated

15、 102 4.4 Evaluation of Applicability of the Methods Investigated to ASME-NH 103 4.5 Recommendations . 104 5 CONCLUSIONS . 106 References 107 Appendix 1 - Creep fatigue experiment data of Mod.9Cr-1Mo . 109 Acknowledgments 111 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 - Additive Stress in the Rupture Curve 28 LIST OF FI

16、GURES Figure 1 - Creep Rupture Data at 450-600C 2 Figure 2 - Fatigue Data and Design Fatigue Curves at 550C . 3 Figure 3 - Static and Cyclic Stress-Strain Curves at 550C . 3 Figure 4 - Creep-Fatigue Data at 500C 4 Figure 5 - Creep-Fatigue Data at 550C 4 Figure 6 - Creep-Fatigue Data at 600C 5 Figure

17、 7 - Creep-Fatigue Data at 550C (Stress Controlled Tests) 5 STP-NU-041 Alternative Simplified Creep-Fatigue Design Methods iv Figure 8 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life with Time Fraction Rule 6 Figure 9 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life with Time Fraction Rule 6 Figure 10 - Rela

18、tion between Creep Rupture Time and Fracture Elongation . 10 Figure 11 - Relation between Inelastic Strain Rate and Creep Rupture Elongation at 500C 10 Figure 12 - Relation between Inelastic Strain Rate and Creep Rupture Elongation at 550C 11 Figure 13 - Relation between Inelastic Strain Rate and Cr

19、eep Rupture Elongation at 600C 11 Figure 14 - Relation between Temperature and Tensile Fracture Elongation 12 Figure 15 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Ductility Exhaustion Method 12 Figure 16 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by Ductility Exhaustion Method 13 Figure 17 - Observed and

20、 Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method 13 Figure 18 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method 14 Figure 19 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method 14 Figure 20 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life

21、 by Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method 15 Figure 21 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method 15 Figure 22 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method 16 Figure 23 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life with Modified Ductility Exha

22、ustion Method for Stress Controlled Tests 16 Figure 24 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method for Stress Controlled Tests 17 Figure 25 - Ratio of Predicted Life to Observed Life against Hold Time 17 Figure 26 - Life Reduction Coefficient as a Function of Pure Fatig

23、ue Life when p is 0.1 . 18 Figure 27 - Life Reduction Coefficient as a Function of Pure Fatigue Life when p is 0.5 . 18 Figure 28 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method for Compressive Hold Tests 19 Figure 29 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by

24、 Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method for Compressive Hold Tests 19 Figure 30 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method 20 Figure 31 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Modified Ductility Exhaustion Method 20 Figure 32 - Observed and Predicted Ten

25、sile Fracture EORQJDWLRQ/0at 550( 21 Figure 33 - Comparison of Estimation of Creep Damage between MDEM and DEM 21 Figure 34 - Comparison of Estimation of Creep Damage between MDEM and DEM 22 Figure 35 - Comparison of Creep-Fatigue Life between MDEM and TFR at 500C 22 Figure 36 - Comparison of Creep-

26、Fatigue Life between MDEM and TFR at 550C 23 Figure 37 - Comparison of Creep-Fatigue Life between MDEM and TFR at 600C 23 Figure 38 - Ratio of Creep-Fatigue Life Predicted by MDEM to that Predicted by TFR at 500C . 24 Figure 39 - Ratio of Creep-Fatigue Life Predicted by MDEM to that Predicted by TFR

27、 at 550C . 24 Alternative Simplified Creep-Fatigue Design Methods STP-NU-041 v Figure 40 - Ratio of Creep-Fatigue Life Predicted by MDEM to that Predicted by TFR at 600C 25 Figure 41 - Formulation of Manson-Coffin Type Relation ppppANDH at 550C . 29 Figure 42 - Formulation of Manson-Coffin Type Rela

28、tion ppppANDH at 600C . 29 Figure 43 - Formulation of Manson-Coffin Type Relation ccccANDH at 550C . 30 Figure 44 - Formulation of Manson-Coffin Type Relation ccccANDH at 600C . 30 Figure 45 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by SRS Method . 31 Figure 46 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by

29、 SRS Method 31 Figure 47 - Comparison of Pure Cyclic Creep Life Determined by Curve Fitting and that Determined by Numerical Integration of Creep Damage at 550C . 32 Figure 48 - Comparison of Pure Cyclic Creep Life Determined by Curve Fitting and that Determined by Numerical Integration of Creep Dam

30、age at 600C . 32 Figure 49 - Difference of Yield Stress between Static and Cyclic Stress-Strain Relations at 550C 33 Figure 50 - Difference of Yield Stress between Static and Cyclic Stress-Strain Relations at 600C 33 Figure 51 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by SRS Method (Case-1). 34 Fi

31、gure 52 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by SRS Method (Case-2). 34 Figure 53 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by SRS Method for Stress Controlled Tests (Case-1 and 2) . 35 Figure 54 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by SRS Method (Case-1) . 35 Figure 55 - Creep-Fatigue Damage

32、Calculated by SRS Method Shown in Normal Scale (Case-1) 36 Figure 56 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by SRS Method (Case-2) . 36 Figure 57 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by SRS Method Shown in Normal Scale (Case-2) 37 Figure 58 - Comparison of Creep-Fatigue Life between SRS (Case-1) and TFR at

33、550C 37 Figure 59 - Comparison of Creep-Fatigue Life between SRS (Case-2) and TFR at 550C 38 Figure 60 - Comparison of Creep-Fatigue Life between SRS (Case-1 and Case-2) and TFR at 600C . 38 Figure 61 - Ratio of Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by SRS Method to that Predicted by TFR at 550C . 39 Figure

34、62 - Ratio of Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by SRS Method to that Predicted by TFR at 600C . 39 Figure 63 - Effect of Additive Stress on Stress Relaxation Behavior (Example-1) . 40 Figure 64 - Effect of Additive Stress on Stress Relaxation Behavior (Example-2) . 40 Figure 65 - Effect of Additive Stre

35、ss on Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life . 41 Figure 66 - Comparison of Np, Nc, and Nf (Case-2, 550C, tH =0.5%) . 41 Figure 67 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life with Tr=Nf_obs.x tH (Case-1) 47 Figure 68 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated with Tr=Nf_obs.x tH (Case-1) 47 STP-NU-041 Alternative Simp

36、lified Creep-Fatigue Design Methods vi Figure 69 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life with Tr=2x104hours (Case-2) 48 Figure 70 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated with Tr=2x104hours (Case-2) 48 Figure 71 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life with Tr=fatigue life x tH(Case-3) . 49 Figure 7

37、2 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated with Tr=fatigue life x tH(Case-3) . 49 Figure 73 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life with Tr=1x106hours (Case-4) 50 Figure 74 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated with Tr=1x106hours (Case-4) 50 Figure 75 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life with Tr=1x1

38、06hours and 2E 51 Figure 76 - Creep-Fatigue Damage with Tr=1x106hours and 2E 51 Figure 77 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life under Stress Controlled Conditions (Case-2) . 52 Figure 78 - Creep-Fatigue Damage under Stress Controlled Conditions (Case-2) . 52 Figure 79 - Observed and Predicted

39、Creep-Fatigue Life under Stress Controlled Conditions (Case-3) . 53 Figure 80 - Creep-Fatigue Damage under Stress Controlled Conditions (Case-3) . 53 Figure 81 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life under Stress Controlled Conditions (Case-4) . 54 Figure 82 - Creep-Fatigue Damage under Stress C

40、ontrolled Conditions (Case-4) . 54 Figure 83 - Relationship between Hold Time and Number of Cycles to Failure ( = 2) 55 Figure 84 - Relationship between Hold Time and Number of Cycles to Failure ( = 4) 55 Figure 85 - Relationship between Hold Time and Number of Cycles to Failure (Tr=1x106hours) . 56

41、 Figure 86 - Relationship between Hold Time and Number of Cycles to Failure ( = 2) 56 Figure 87 - Cyclic Stress-Strain Relations and Effects of Hold Time on Them . 57 Figure 88 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Interaction (Tr=1x105hours) 57 Figure 89 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Interaction (Tr=1x106hours) 58 Figur

42、e 90 - Creep Rupture Ductility at Various Temperatures . 60 Figure 91 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method, k=0 60 Figure 92 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method, k=0.25 . 61 Figure 93 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method, k=0.5

43、 . 61 Figure 94 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method, k=0.75 . 62 Figure 95 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method, k=1 62 Figure 96 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by Hybrid Method, All Conditions 63 Figure 97 - Relation between k and Standard Deviati

44、on of Life Prediction . 63 Figure 98 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method, k=0.33 . 64 Figure 99 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated by Hybrid Method, All Conditions 64 Figure 100 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method, k=0 65 Alternative Simplified Creep-

45、Fatigue Design Methods STP-NU-041 vii Figure 101 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method, k=0.5 65 Figure 102 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method, k=1 . 66 Figure 103 - Relation between k and Standard Deviation of Life Prediction . 66 Figure 104 - Creep-

46、Fatigue Damage Calculated by Hybrid Method . 67 Figure 105 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method under Stress Control, k=0 67 Figure 106 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method under Stress Control, k=0.5 . 68 Figure 107 - Observed and Predicted Creep-Fati

47、gue Life by Hybrid Method under Stress Control, k=1 68 Figure 108 - Creep-Fatigue Damage Calculated By Hybrid Method under Stress Controlled Conditions 69 Figure 109 - Comparison of Creep-Fatigue Life at Various Strain Ranges at 500C 69 Figure 110 - Comparison of Creep-Fatigue Life at Various Strain

48、 Ranges at 550C 70 Figure 111 - Comparison of Creep-Fatigue Life at Various Strain Ranges at 600C 70 Figure 112 - Ratio of Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method to that Predicted by TFR at 500C . 71 Figure 113 - Ratio of Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method to that Predicted by TFR

49、at 550C . 71 Figure 114 - Ratio of Predicted Creep-Fatigue Life by Hybrid Method to that Predicted by TFR at 600C . 72 Figure 115 - SMT Methodology. 76 Figure 116 - 4 Bar Model . 77 Figure 117 - Stepped Bar Test Specimen . 77 Figure 118 - Notched Bar Specimen 77 Figure 119 - Stepped Bar Test Results . 78 Figure 120 - Notched Bar Test Results 78 Figure 121 - 3URSRVHG6076SHFLPHQT . 78 Figure 122 - Parameter for