Ingenieurwissenschaften und zugeordnete Tätigkeiten
Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
- 2017 (2) (entfernen)
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (2)
Referierte Publikation
- ja (2) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Fatigue damage (1)
- Fatigue life time (1)
- ISO 6892-1 (1)
- Life time prediction (1)
- TENSTAND WP4 Final Report (1)
- TMF (1)
- Tensile testing procedure (1)
- Thermo-mechanical fatigue (1)
Components in the Aerospace, Power and Automotive engineering sectors are frequently subjected to cyclic stresses induced by thermal fluctuations and mechanical loads. For the design of such components, reliable material property data are required which need to be acquired using well accepted and reproducible test procedures for thermo-mechanical fatigue (TMF) loading. There is limited availability of proven TMF data indicating there is need for further research and testing. The TMF behaviour of materials is often desired to be simulated in models which describe the cyclic stress-strain behaviour, the fatigue life and the cyclic crack growth behaviour. There is a continuous need for the development and amendment of such models. Models can be validated by using materials in industrial applications which are subjected to TMF loading.
The 3rd Workshop on Thermo-Mechanical Fatigue was held on 27–29 April 2016 at BAM, Berlin, Germany. The workshop was attended by 90 attendees coming from 17 countries in the world. 38 presentations including five poster presentations were held.
The following topics were covered by the workshop:
– TMF of materials coated with Thermal Barrier Coatings.
– Thermal Gradient Mechanical Fatigue.
– TMF crack growth.
– TMF + High Cycle Fatigue.
– TMF Modelling and Lifetime Prediction.
– TMF Properties of steels, cast iron, Al-, Mg- and Ni-alloys
– Advanced TMF Testing Techniques.
– Industrial Applications.
A panel discussion was held regarding the present state of TMF testing standards (ISO and ASTM) and their potential for improvement. The discussion and contributions were summarized and forwarded to the standard committees. The 3rd TMF-Workshop ensured the continuation of international exchange of knowledge providing a forum to present and discuss all recent developments in the field of thermo-mechanical fatigue.
The current special issue publishes eleven selected papers of the 3rd TMF-Workshop 2016. The papers were peer reviewed by a number of experts in the Thermo-Mechanical Fatigue sector. I hope you will enjoy reading papers of this special issue.
The authors, Li et al., of the paper entitled “Analysis on the Issues in ISO 6892-1 and
TENSTAND WP4 Report Based on Data to Confirm Tests by 21 Laboratories” (J. Test. Eval.
DOI: 10.1520/JTE20150479 (online only)) have expressed views that the authors of this
rebuttal believe to be based on fundamental misunderstandings and misinterpretations of
the tensile testing standard ISO 6892-1:2009, ISO 6892-1:2016, and its former versions, thus
leading to erroneous conclusions. This refutation is intended to clarify the understanding of
ISO 6892-1 and to address the misunderstandings and the misinterpretations of the authors of the paper. The present standard ISO 6892-1:2016 has a long history dating back to the 1970s. At that time, the tensile testing procedure was standardized on the National and
International scale in parallel. To understand the present standard, the knowledge of the
history helps to understand the background of details of the testing procedure implemented today. The history of the tensile testing standard has been discussed extensively during the
annual international standardization meeting of ISO committee TC 164 SC1 for the last few years, at which some of the authors of the Li et al. paper attended. The authors continue to disagree with facts that were agreed by the consortium of the European
research project TENSTAND and by the present international experts involved in ISO TC 164 SC1. It appears that the principal objective of the authors regarding their present publication was to increase the testing speed during tensile testing. However, the international standardization community has previously declined similar proposals by some of the authors. Many arguments
presented by Li et al. were thus refuted. The conclusions of their paper are misleading and the international standardization community for tensile testing refused to revise the present standard, ISO 6892-1 (2016), according the authors’ proposals.