RILEM TC 195-DTD (2002-2006): Round Robin Test Program on Free Deformation Rigs; Planning, Test Results, and Statistical Evaluation

CONCREEP 10 ◽  
2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ø. Bjøntegaard ◽  
T. A. Martius-Hammer
Author(s):  
Sanjay Tiku ◽  
Nick Pussegoda ◽  
Morvarid Ghovanlou ◽  
W. R. Tyson ◽  
Aaron Dinovitzer

Fracture toughness of steels is conventionally measured using bend specimens and provides a conservative estimate of toughness when the actual loading is in tension. There has been widespread interest in characterizing the toughness that occurs with reduced constraint to better reflect constraint conditions typical of a relatively shallow girth weld flaw. There is currently a standardized approach to measure fracture toughness in tension loaded specimens, however, it requires testing of multiple specimens to generate a resistance curve. Recent developments in fracture toughness testing and analysis of tension loaded specimens have led to publications by CANMET and Exxon Mobil Upstream Research Company toward development of a single-specimen procedure. As part of an initiative to enhance the state of the art in strain based design and assessment methods, with the intent of providing support for the standardization of appropriate weld testing methods, BMT under a Pipeline research Council International (PRCI) project has combined the two single-specimen approaches and developed a recommended practice for fracture toughness testing using single-edge-notched tension SENT (or SE(T)) samples with fixed grip loading. The procedure has been assessed by means of a round robin test program involving laboratories from around the world. Girth welds were fabricated and base metal, heat affected zone and weld center line specimens were prepared and sent to round robin participants. For the round robin program all the participants used a double clip gauge arrangement for direct CTOD measurement and electric potential drop measurement or unloading compliance method for crack growth measurement. In this paper, the results of the round robin test program including comparison of J and CTOD resistance curves will be presented and discussed.


1990 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Koehl ◽  
K. Moeller ◽  
Bo Carlsson ◽  
Ulrich Frei ◽  
P. R. Dolley ◽  
...  

1988 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. I. Stephens ◽  
H. D. Berns ◽  
R. A. Chernenkoff ◽  
R. L. Indig ◽  
S. K. Koh ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryu Watakabe ◽  
Masaya Tanaka ◽  
Yasuhito Takahashi ◽  
Koji Fujiwara ◽  
Yoshiyuki Ishihara ◽  
...  

Gefahrstoffe ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 80 (04) ◽  
pp. 141-150
Author(s):  
R. Oppl ◽  
M. Broege ◽  
F. Kuebart ◽  
T. Neuhaus ◽  
M. Wensing

The Association for the Control of Emissions in Products for Flooring Installation, Adhesives and Building Materials (GEV) organised a round-robin test in 2017. They wanted to establish a list of recommended testing laboratories on the basis of test results. 33 laboratories from twelve countries received three spiked test products, similar to flooring adhesives and a parquet lacquer. Less variation of results was observed compared to earlier round-robin tests, but the differences between the testing laboratories were still significant. This fact inspired a discussion regarding the analytical challenges. As an example, the parameter „sum of all volatile organic compounds (VOCs) without a target value“ includes the non-identified VOCs. This round-robin test showed a relative standard deviation of 100% and more for that parameter, which questions its reliability. The performance of 16 laboratories was rated as good by GEV. Currently, a list of recommended testing laboratories for GEV emissions testing comprises eleven laboratories from two countries. These laboratories performed well in this round-robin test and presented an appropriate accreditation according to ISO/IEC 17025.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document