ASTM C1239-2013 Standard Practice for Reporting Uniaxial Strength Data and Estimating Weibull Distribution Parameters for Advanced Ceramics《高级陶瓷用报告单轴强度数据和评估维泊尔分布参数的标准实施规程》.pdf

《ASTM C1239-2013 Standard Practice for Reporting Uniaxial Strength Data and Estimating Weibull Distribution Parameters for Advanced Ceramics《高级陶瓷用报告单轴强度数据和评估维泊尔分布参数的标准实施规程》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ASTM C1239-2013 Standard Practice for Reporting Uniaxial Strength Data and Estimating Weibull Distribution Parameters for Advanced Ceramics《高级陶瓷用报告单轴强度数据和评估维泊尔分布参数的标准实施规程》.pdf（18页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Designation: C1239 13Standard Practice forReporting Uniaxial Strength Data and Estimating WeibullDistribution Parameters for Advanced Ceramics1This standard is issued under the fixed designation C1239; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the

2、 case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This practice covers the evaluation and reporting ofuniaxial strength data and the esti

3、mation of Weibull probabilitydistribution parameters for advanced ceramics that fail in abrittle fashion (see Fig. 1). The estimated Weibull distributionparameters are used for statistical comparison of the relativequality of two or more test data sets and for the prediction ofthe probability of fai

4、lure (or, alternatively, the fracturestrength) for a structure of interest. In addition, this practiceencourages the integration of mechanical property data andfractographic analysis.1.2 The failure strength of advanced ceramics is treated as acontinuous random variable determined by the flaw popula

5、tion.Typically, a number of test specimens with well-definedgeometry are failed under isothermal, well-defined displace-ment and/or force-application conditions. The force at whicheach test specimen fails is recorded. The resulting failure stressdata are used to obtain Weibull parameter estimates as

6、sociatedwith the underlying flaw population distribution.1.3 This practice is restricted to the assumption that thedistribution underlying the failure strengths is the two-parameter Weibull distribution with size scaling. Furthermore,this practice is restricted to test specimens (tensile, flexural,p

7、ressurized ring, etc.) that are primarily subjected to uniaxialstress states. The practice also assumes that the flaw populationis stable with time and that no slow crack growth is occurring.1.4 The practice outlines methods to correct for bias errorsin the estimated Weibull parameters and to calcul

8、ate confi-dence bounds on those estimates from data sets where allfailures originate from a single flaw population (that is, a singlefailure mode). In samples where failures originate from mul-tiple independent flaw populations (for example, competingfailure modes), the methods outlined in Section 9

9、 for biascorrection and confidence bounds are not applicable.1.5 This practice includes the following:SectionScope 1Referenced Documents 2Terminology 3Summary of Practice 4Significance and Use 5Interferences 6Outlying Observations 7Maximum Likelihood Parameter Estimators forCompeting Flaw Distributi

10、ons8Unbiasing Factors and Confidence Bounds 9Fractography 10Examples 11Keywords 12Computer Algorithm MAXL AppendixX1Test Specimens with Unidentified FractureOriginsAppendixX21.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as thestandard per IEEE/ASTM SI 10.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standa

11、rds:2C1145 Terminology of Advanced CeramicsC1322 Practice for Fractography and Characterization ofFracture Origins in Advanced CeramicsE6 Terminology Relating to Methods of Mechanical TestingE178 Practice for Dealing With Outlying ObservationsE456 Terminology Relating to Quality and StatisticsIEEE/A

12、STM SI 10 American National Standard for Use ofthe International System of Units (SI): The Modern MetricSystem3. Terminology3.1 Proper use of the following terms and equations willalleviate misunderstanding in the presentation of data and inthe calculation of strength distribution parameters.3.1.1 c

13、ensored strength datastrength measurements (thatis, a sample) containing suspended observations such as thatproduced by multiple competing or concurrent flaw popula-tions.1This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee C28 on AdvancedCeramicsand is the direct responsibility of Subcommitte

14、e C28.01 on MechanicalProperties and Performance.Current edition approved Aug. 1, 2013. Published September 2013. Originallyapproved in 1993. Last previous edition approved in 2007 as C1239 07. DOI:10.1520/C1239-13.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, orcontact ASTM

15、Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page onthe ASTM website.Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States13.1.1.1 Consider a sample where

16、fractography clearly estab-lished the existence of three concurrent flaw distributions(although this discussion is applicable to a sample with anynumber of concurrent flaw distributions). The three concurrentflaw distributions are referred to here as distributions A, B, andC. Based on fractographic

17、analyses, each test specimenstrength is assigned to a flaw distribution that initiated failure.In estimating parameters that characterize the strength distri-bution associated with flaw distribution A, all test specimens(and not just those that failed from Type A flaws) must beincorporated in the an

18、alysis to ensure efficiency and accuracyof the resulting parameter estimates. The strength of a testspecimen that failed by a Type B (or Type C) flaw is treated asa right censored observation relative to the A flaw distribution.Failure due to a Type B (or Type C) flaw restricts, or censors,the infor

19、mation concerning Type A flaws in a test specimen bysuspending the test before failure occurred by a Type A flaw(1).3The strength from the most severe Type A flaw in thosetest specimens that failed from Type B (or Type C) flaws ishigher than (and thus to the right of) the observed strength.However,

20、no information is provided regarding the magnitudeof that difference. Censored data analysis techniques incorpo-rated in this practice utilize this incomplete information toprovide efficient and relatively unbiased estimates of thedistribution parameters.3.2 Definitions:3.2.1 competing failure modes

21、distinguishably differenttypes of fracture initiation events that result from concurrent(competing) flaw distributions.3.2.2 compound flaw distributionsany form of multipleflaw distribution that is neither pure concurrent nor pureexclusive. A simple example is where every test specimencontains the f

22、law distribution A, while some fraction of the testspecimens also contains a second independent flaw distributionB.3.2.3 concurrent flaw distributionstype of multiple flawdistribution in a homogeneous material where every testspecimen of that material contains representative flaws fromeach independe

23、nt flaw population. Within a given testspecimen, all flaw populations are then present concurrentlyand are competing with each other to cause failure. This termis synonymous with “competing flaw distributions.”3.2.4 effective gage sectionthat portion of the test speci-men geometry that has been incl

24、uded within the limits ofintegration (volume, area, or edge length) of the Weibulldistribution function. In tensile test specimens, the integrationmay be restricted to the uniformly stressed central gagesection, or it may be extended to include transition and shankregions.3.2.5 estimatorwell-defined

25、 function that is dependent onthe observations in a sample. The resulting value for a givensample may be an estimate of a distribution parameter (a pointestimate) associated with the underlying population. The arith-metic average of a sample is, for example, an estimator of thedistribution mean.3.2.

26、6 exclusive flaw distributionstype of multiple flawdistribution created by mixing and randomizing test specimensfrom two or more versions of a material where each versioncontains a different single flaw population. Thus, each testspecimen contains flaws exclusively from a single distribution,but the

27、 total data set reflects more than one type of strength-controlling flaw. This term is synonymous with “mixtures offlaw distributions.”3.2.7 extraneous flawsstrength-controlling flaws observedin some fraction of test specimens that cannot be present in thecomponent being designed. An example is mach

28、ining flaws inground bend test specimens that will not be present inas-sintered components of the same material.3.2.8 fractographyanalysis and characterization of pat-terns generated on the fracture surface of a test specimen.Fractography can be used to determine the nature and locationof the critic

29、al fracture origin causing catastrophic failure in anadvanced ceramic test specimen or component.3.2.9 fracture originthe source from which brittle fracturecommences (Terminology C1145).3.2.10 multiple flaw distributionsstrength controllingflaws observed by fractography where distinguishably differe

30、ntflaw types are identified as the failure initiation site withindifferent test specimens of the data set and where the flaw typesare known or expected to originate from independent causes.3.2.10.1 DiscussionAn example of multiple flaw distribu-tions would be carbon inclusions and large voids which

31、mayboth have been observed as strength controlling flaws within adata set and where there is no reason to believe that thefrequency or distribution of carbon inclusions created duringfabrication was in any way dependent on the frequency ordistribution of voids (or vice-versa).3.2.11 populationtotali

32、ty of potential observations aboutwhich inferences are made.3.2.12 population meanaverage of all potential measure-ments in a given population weighted by their relative frequen-cies in the population.3The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end ofthis practice.FIG

33、. 1 Example of Weibull Plot of Strength DataC1239 1323.2.13 probability density functionfunction f(x) is a prob-ability density function for the continuous random variable Xif:fx! $0 (1)and*2f x! dx 5 1 (2)The probability that the random variable X assumes avalue between a and b is given by the foll

34、owing equation:Pra,X,b! 5 *abfx! dx (3)3.2.14 samplecollection of measurements or observationstaken from a specified population.3.2.15 skewnessterm relating to the asymmetry of a prob-ability density function. The distribution of failure strength foradvanced ceramics is not symmetric with respect to

35、 themaximum value of the distribution function but has one taillonger than the other.3.2.16 statistical biasinherent to most estimates, this is atype of consistent numerical offset in an estimate relative to thetrue underlying value. The magnitude of the bias error typicallydecreases as the sample s

36、ize increases.3.2.17 unbiased estimatorestimator that has been cor-rected for statistical bias error.3.2.18 Weibull distributioncontinuous random variable Xhas a two-parameter Weibull distribution if the probabilitydensity function is given by the following equations:fx! 5SmDSxDm21expF2SxDmGx.0 (4)f

37、x! 5 0 x #0 (5)and the cumulative distribution function is given by thefollowing equations:Fx! 5 1 2 expF2SxDmGx.0 (6)orFx! 5 0 x #0 (7)wherem = Weibull modulus (or the shape parameter) (0), and = scale parameter (0).3.2.19 The random variable representing uniaxial tensilestrength of an advanced cer

38、amic will assume only positivevalues, and the distribution is asymmetrical about the mean.These characteristics rule out the use of the normal distribution(as well as others) and point to the use of the Weibull andsimilar skewed distributions. If the random variable represent-ing uniaxial tensile st

39、rength of an advanced ceramic is char-acterized by Eq 4-7, then the probability that this advancedceramic will fail under an applied uniaxial tensile stress isgiven by the cumulative distribution function as follows:Pf5 1 2 expF2SDmG.0 (8)Pf5 0 #0 (9)where:Pf= probability of failure, and= Weibull ch

40、aracteristic strength.Note that the Weibull characteristic strength is dependent onthe uniaxial test specimen (tensile, flexural, or pressurized ring)and will change with test specimen size and geometry. Inaddition, the Weibull characteristic strength has units of stressand should be reported using

41、units of megapascals or gigapas-cals.3.2.20 An alternative expression for the probability offailure is given by the following equation:Pf5 1 2 expF2*vS0DmdVG.0 (10)Pf5 0 #0 (11)The integration in the exponential is performed over alltensile regions of the test specimen volume if the strength-control

42、ling flaws are randomly distributed through the volumeof the material, or over all tensile regions of the test specimenarea if flaws are restricted to the test specimen surface. Theintegration is sometimes carried out over an effective gagesection instead of over the total volume or area. In Eq 10,

43、0isthe Weibull material scale parameter. The parameter is amaterial property if the two-parameter Weibull distributionproperly describes the strength behavior of the material. Inaddition, the Weibull material scale parameter can be describedas the Weibull characteristic strength of a test specimen w

44、ithunit volume or area forced in uniform uniaxial tension. TheWeibull material scale parameter has units of stress(volume)1/mand should be reported using units of MPa(m)3/morGPa(m)3/mif the strength-controlling flaws are distributedthrough the volume of the material. If the strength-controllingflaws

45、 are restricted to the surface of the test specimens in asample, then the Weibull material scale parameter should bereported using units of MPa(m)2/mor GPa(m)2/m. For a giventest specimen geometry, Eq 8 and Eq 10 can be equated, whichyields an expression relating 0and . Further discussionrelated to

46、this issue can be found in 7.6.3.3 For definitions of other statistical terms, terms related tomechanical testing, and terms related to advanced ceramicsused in this practice, refer to Terminologies E456, C1145, andE6 or to appropriate textbooks on statistics (2-5) .3.4 Symbols:A = test specimen are

47、a (or area of effective gage section,if used).b = gage section dimension, base of bend test specimen.d = gage section dimension, depth of bend test specimen.F(x) = cumulative distribution function.f(x) = probability density function.Li= length of the inner span for a bend test specimen.Lo= length of

48、 the outer span for a bend test specimen.+ = likelihood function.m = Weibull modulus.m = estimate of the Weibull modulus.mU= unbiased estimate of the Weibull modulus.N = number of test specimens in a sample.Pf= probability of failure.C1239 133r = number of test specimens that failed from the flawpop

49、ulation for which the Weibull estimators are beingcalculated.t = intermediate quantity defined by Eq 27, used incalculation of confidence bounds.V = test specimen volume (or volume of effective gagesection, if used).X = random variable.x = realization of a random variable X. = Weibull scale parameter. = stopping tolerance in the computer algorithm MAXL. = estimate of mean strength. = uniaxial tensile stress.i= maximum stress in the ith test specimen at failure.j= maximum stress in the jth test specimen at failure.O