journal article·2023-11-02

Acoustic emission data classification of 18 percent Ni maraging steel 250 specimens during tensile deformation

Gowrishankar Wuriti, Somnath Chattopadhyaya, Tessy Thomas, Sridhar Wuriti

Publisher page

Abstract

Acoustic emission (AE) evaluation is an important Nondestructive Testing technique. The technique is a whole field passive technique that detects defects that are growing during the application of force on the structure. At a certain threshold, AE starts emanating from the structure while the structure is stressed by tensile deformation. 18% Ni Maraging steel 250 grade material is widely used in the aerospace industry and exhibits fracture behaviour. In the current study, tensile specimens are used and acoustic emission (AE) parameters are recorded. Four types of specimens Type A, Type B, Type C and Type D specimens are designated as heat -affected zone, parent metal, defect-free weldment and weld with notch defect, respectively. These specimens are tensile deformed in order to obtain AE parameters at 60% of failure load (FL), 60–75% of FL, 75–90% of FL and 90% to FL. AE parameters – amplitude, ring down counts, duration, rise time, energy, RA value, DA value, hit rate, count rate and energy rate – are tabulated for various FLs. These parameters have vital importance in critical assessment of the structural integrity of 18% Ni Maraging steel 250 structures.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Rock Mechanics and Modeling · Hydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metals

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Advanced Systems Laboratory, Defence Research and Development Organization, New Delhi, India

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (ISM), Dhanbad, India

Director General, Defence Research and Development Organization, New Delhi, India

Department of Mathematics, KL University, Guntur, India

References (34)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.10714610.1016/j.ymssp.2020.107146 ↗
2. Marfo A, Chen Z, Li J. Acoustic emission analysis of fatigue crack growth in steel structures. J Civ Eng Constr Technol. 2013;4:239–249.
3. 10.1016/j.phpro.2010.01.10210.1016/j.phpro.2010.01.102 ↗
4. 10.1007/s10853-009-4095-210.1007/s10853-009-4095-2 ↗
5. 10.1016/S0143-974X(02)00065-210.1016/S0143-974X(02)00065-2 ↗
6. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.204-205.34110.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.204-205.341 ↗
7. 10.1016/0963-8695(92)90639-X10.1016/0963-8695(92)90639-X ↗
8. 10.1016/0956-716X(92)90354-H10.1016/0956-716X(92)90354-H ↗
9. 10.1007/BF0232313010.1007/BF02323130 ↗
10. 10.1080/10589759.2015.107085010.1080/10589759.2015.1070850 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.ijpvp.2010.08.01610.1016/j.ijpvp.2010.08.016 ↗
12. 10.1088/0022-3735/20/8/00110.1088/0022-3735/20/8/001 ↗
13. 10.21012/FC9.23710.21012/FC9.237 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.net.2015.04.00110.1016/j.net.2015.04.001 ↗
15. 10.1007/s10921-019-0639-910.1007/s10921-019-0639-9 ↗
16. Lyasota I, Sarniak L, Kustra P. Acoustic emission snalysisanalysis of the plastic deformation stages of degraded low-carbon steel after long-term operation in the oil refining and petrochemical processing. Arch Metall Mater. 2019;64(3):53–60.
17. 10.1016/j.acme.2018.09.01110.1016/j.acme.2018.09.011 ↗
18. 10.1179/1743278214Y.000000023010.1179/1743278214Y.0000000230 ↗
19. 10.1080/1744530090313309910.1080/17445300903133099 ↗
20. 10.1007/s10921-019-0627-010.1007/s10921-019-0627-0 ↗
21. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.970.13710.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.970.137 ↗
22. Macek W, Rozumek D, Królczyk GM. Surface topography analysis based on fatigue fractures obtained with bending of the 2017A-T4 alloy. MeasMeasurement. 2020;152:107347.
23. Macek W, Marciniak Z, Branco R, et al. A fractographic study exploring the fracture surface topography of S355J2 steel after pseudo-random bending-torsion fatigue tests. MeasMeasurement. 2021;178:109443.
24. 10.1016/j.cma.2020.11337310.1016/j.cma.2020.113373 ↗
25. 10.1177/095440971771129210.1177/0954409717711292 ↗
26. Ghaderi JS. Determining the characteristics of acoustic emission in the fatigue crack growth of aluminum alloy 2025 for online structural monitoring. In: Advances in fatigue and fracture testing and modelling. IntechOpen; 2021.
27. 10.3390/app11241189210.3390/app112411892 ↗
28. 10.3390/machines904007310.3390/machines9040073 ↗
29. Chuluunbat T, Lu C, Kostryzhev AG, et al. Influence of loading conditions during tensile testing on acoustic emission. In: Key engineering materials. Vol. 626. Trans Tech Publications Ltd; 2015. pp. 121–126.
30. 10.1016/j.ijpvp.2005.12.00410.1016/j.ijpvp.2005.12.004 ↗
31. 10.1007/978-3-319-99353-9_4610.1007/978-3-319-99353-9_46 ↗
32. 10.1784/insi.2022.64.9.49610.1784/insi.2022.64.9.496 ↗
33. Wuriti GS, Chattopadhyaya S, Krolczyk G. Comparison of acoustic emission data acquired during tensile deformation of maraging steel M250 welded specimens. Arch Acoust. 2020;221–231.
34. 10.1080/10589759.2021.190901310.1080/10589759.2021.1909013 ↗