Concept of “chemical notch” to study stress-corrosion
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract In this article, a new partially immersed slow strain rate (SSR) and corrosion-fatigue (CF) test methods are described and discussed. Partial immersion of a specimen in 3.5 % NaCl solution creates an interface between the solution and air. We call this a “chemical notch” stress concentration factor. The outcome of this demonstrates that the SSR test condition on a smooth specimen will fail at the interface if the machined notch stress concentration factor is less than the “chemical notch” stress concentration factor. This “chemical notch” concept can be applied to correlate corrosion-fatigue S–N data for a specific material/environment system.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Hydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metals · Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Corrosion Behavior and Inhibition
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering , Western Michigan University , Kalamazoo , MI 49008 , USA
Technical Data Analysis, Inc. Falls Church , VA 22043 , USA
References (12)
Show source-provided references
1. ASTM G129-21 (2021). Standard practice for slow strain rate testing to evaluate the susceptibility of metallic materials to environmentally assisted cracking. ASTM International, Philadelphia PA.
2. ASTM G44-21 (2021). Standard practice for exposure of metals and alloys by alternate immersion in neutral 3.5 % sodium chloride solution. ASTM International, Philadelphia PA.
3. De Jong, H.F. (1976). The constant strain rate method – a useful method for testing stress corrosion cracking, Report VTH-214, Delf University and Technology, Department of Aerospace Engineering.
4. Dowling, N.E., Kampe, S.L., and Karl, M.V. (2019). Mechanical behavior of materials, 5th ed. Pearson, England.
5. Henthorne, M. (2016). The slow strain rate stress corrosion cracking test — a 50 year retrospective. Corrosion 72: 1488–1518, https://doi.org/10.5006/2137.10.5006/2137 ↗
6. Kujawski, D., Vasudevan, A.K., Plano, S., and Gabellone, D. (2024). Using a reverse life plot for estimating fatigue endurance/limit. Corros. Rev., https://doi.org/10.1515/corrrev-2023-0141.10.1515/corrrev-2023-0141 ↗
7. Lee, T.T. (2009). Effects of stress concentration on fatigue crack initiation and failure in air and corrosive environment, Master’s thesis. Western Michigan University, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Kalamazoo, MI.
8. Lee, Y.J.H., Kim, Y., and Kim, S. (2012). Effect of testing variables on stress corrosion cracking susceptibility of Al 2024-T351. Corros. Sci. 55: 10–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2011.09.021.10.1016/j.corsci.2011.09.021 ↗
9. Lian, P., Huang, A., Gu, H., Zou, Y., Fu, L., and Wang, Y. (2018). Towards prediction of local corrosion on alumina refractories driven by Marangoni convection. Ceramic International 44: 1675–1680, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.10.095.10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.10.095 ↗
10. Parkins, R. (1993). Slow strain rate testing – 25 years in slow rate testing for the evaluation of environmentally induced cracking: research and engineering applications. ASTM STP 1210, Philadelphia PA.10.1520/STP12751S ↗
11. Raja, V. and Shoji, T. (2011). Stress corrosion cracking. Theory and practice. Woodhead Publishing Ltd, Oxford, UK.10.1533/9780857093769 ↗
12. Reddy, P.C. (2015). Modeling of environmentally assisted fatigue crack growth behavior, Ph.D. thesis. Western Michigan University. Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Kalamazoo, MI.