ASTM E1290 previously used the plastic hinge model for the calculation of CTOD, but has changed its CTOD calculation to J-based conversion since 2002. In this study, the ratio of ASTM-CTOD to BS-CTOD was analytically predicted and experimentally evaluated in linepipes. It was demonstrated that the CTOD ratio changed according to CTOD itself, and took a minimum in a CTOD ratio curve. The minimum value of the CTOD ratio was lower than 1 for low yield-to-tensile ratios, but higher than 1 for high yield-to-tensile ratios. The CTOD ratio tends to be higher than 1 for high CTOD caused by plastic instability, but around or less than 1 for low CTOD possibly caused by brittle fracture in X65 and X80. A CTOD transformation equation, which was proposed by the authors, can transform BS-CTOD into ASTM-CTOD with reasonable accuracy.
Skip Nav Destination
ASME 2009 28th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
May 31–June 5, 2009
Honolulu, Hawaii, USA
Conference Sponsors:
- Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering Division
ISBN:
978-0-7918-4346-8
PROCEEDINGS PAPER
A Comparison Between BS7448-CTOD and ASTM E1290-CTOD in Linepipes
Yoichi Kayamori,
Yoichi Kayamori
Nippon Steel Corporation, Futtsu, Chiba, Japan
Search for other works by this author on:
Takehiro Inoue,
Takehiro Inoue
Nippon Steel Corporation, Futtsu, Chiba, Japan
Search for other works by this author on:
Tetsuya Tagawa
Tetsuya Tagawa
Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan
Search for other works by this author on:
Yoichi Kayamori
Nippon Steel Corporation, Futtsu, Chiba, Japan
Takehiro Inoue
Nippon Steel Corporation, Futtsu, Chiba, Japan
Tetsuya Tagawa
Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan
Paper No:
OMAE2009-79526, pp. 101-106; 6 pages
Published Online:
February 16, 2010
Citation
Kayamori, Y, Inoue, T, & Tagawa, T. "A Comparison Between BS7448-CTOD and ASTM E1290-CTOD in Linepipes." Proceedings of the ASME 2009 28th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering. Volume 6: Materials Technology; C.C. Mei Symposium on Wave Mechanics and Hydrodynamics; Offshore Measurement and Data Interpretation. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. May 31–June 5, 2009. pp. 101-106. ASME. https://doi.org/10.1115/OMAE2009-79526
Download citation file:
11
Views
Related Proceedings Papers
Related Articles
Validity of Toughness Measurements From Miniature Specimens Failing in Different Fracture Modes
J. Pressure Vessel Technol (October,2024)
Elliptical-Arc-Fillet Flexure Hinges: Toward a Generalized Model for Commonly Used Flexure Hinges
J. Mech. Des (August,2011)
Fracture Toughness of ASTM A533 Grade B Class 1 Heavy Section Submerged Arc Weldments
J. Basic Eng (June,1971)
Related Chapters
Background InformatIon
Guidebook for the Design of ASME Section VIII Pressure Vessels
Subsection NB—Class 1 Components
Companion Guide to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Volume 1, Third Edition
Impact Testing
A Quick Guide to API 510 Certified Pressure Vessel Inspector Syllabus