Sample Machining for the CTOD Test

Unlike other destructive material tests, the CTOD test has multiple factors that can affect the resultant value. Not only is
the test temperature a variable, but the specimen size can also affect the results, as well as the conditions in which the
result can be used. It is important to use the maximum thickness of specimen possible when performing the test. As a
general rule, if a material meets the TOD test requirements at a given test size, then the results can be extrapolated to
apply to thinner sections, but not thicker.

The test piece itself is 'proportional' - the length, depth and thickness of each specimen are inter-related so that,
irrespective of material thickness, each specimen has the same proportions.

There are two basic forms - a square or a rectangular cross section specimen. If the specimen thickness is defined as 'B',
the depth (W) will be either B or 2B with a standard length of 4.6W. A notch is machined at the centre and then extended
by generating a fatigue crack so that the total 'defect' length is half the depth of the test piece- Test on a 100mm thick
weld will therefore require a specimen measuring 100mm thick, 200mm wide and 920mm long - an expensive operation,
the validity of which can only be determined once the test has been completed.

where is the CTOD, F is the load, S the span, B the specimen thickness, W the specimen width, a the crack
length, v the poisons ratio, Vp the plastic component corresponding to the load at the critical event, z is
the clip gage height and YS is the yield at test temperature.
The location of the notch in the weld HAZ or parent metal is important as an incorrectly positioned fatigue crack will not
sample the required area, making the test invalid. To be certain that the crack tip is in the correct region, polishing and
etching followed by a metallurgical examination are often carried out prior to machining the notch and fatigue cracking.
This enables the notch to be positioned very accurately. Examination may also be carried out after testing as further
confirmation of the validity of the test results.

Initiation and Growth of a Crack

To initiate and grow a fatigue crack for a CTOD test, various methods can be used.

a. Constant Load - A constant load amplitude (load) is the most common situation. However, for the purposes of
growing a fatigue crack for a CTOD it is not the most practical. In order to meet the validity requirements imposed by the
specifications, the load ratio selected would have to be determined based on the final crack length. As a result, the crack
growth rate would increase as the length increased; however, it would be slow in the initial stages of crack length. This
method can result in an extended time to grow the crack of the required length.

b. Decreasing Load - By calculating the load restrictions for a given crack length, it is possible to start the fatigue
operation with a high load and decrease it to the limits required as the crack grows. Done carefully, this can save time in
obtaining valid fatigue crack front, but it should be noted that reducing the load by too great an amount can result in the
crack propagation slowing or even stopping. In this case, a given number of fatigue cycles would be needed to initiate the
crack again.

c. Constant K - During the fatiguing of a CTOD sample, S, W and B will remain constant. As such, the relationship
between the crack length, load and stress intensity can be utilized in the growth of a fatigue crack. From the equation it
can be seen that by keeping the change in stress intensity constant, the load will drop proportionally as the crack length
increases.

This method will result in an even load drop as the crack grows and will prevent the crack arrest that can occur when
method b is used.

It is possible to combine aspects of the three methods to further increase to efficiencies of the crack propagation. By
starting with a high K and reducing it as the crack extends, one can reduce the time necessary to grow a crack while keeping
within the specification requirements.

Tracking Crack Length

Tracking the actual crack length can be done in a number of ways, such as:

a. Visual measurement can be made on the sample. Using this method, only the crack length at the outer surface can
be determined. To enhance the crack, non-destructive testing techniques such as dye penetrant or magnetic
permeability work well.
b. The compliance technique depends on a 5th order polynomial in which the coefficients are based on the specimen
geometry and material properties. Typically, a clip gage is attached to the sample at the machined opening and
electronically records the opening that is then related to the crack length. The recorded length can then be used to
automatically adjust the load, based on the method decided for the crack growth, resulting in a smooth load drop.

c. The potential drop across the crack depends on ohms law: as a crack grows the potential will increase. As with the
compliance technique, this method can be directly associated with the load control and hence give a smooth load
transition.

While performing the fatigue operation, it is important to remember that only the outer surface can be measured and
confirmed. The fatigue is propagating across a plane inside the sample, and as such the length cannot be visually confirmed
until the test is complete and the sample fractured open. The compliance and potential drop techniques can provide
information about the internal situation of the fatigue crack.

Calculating CTOD Values

From the plot, the maximum load and the plastic component (Vp) of the crack opening is determined for use in
the CTOD calculation.

The CTOD value is calculated from the following formula:

where is the CTOD, F is the load, S the span, B the specimen thickness, W the specimen width, a the
crack length, v the poisons ratio, Vp the plastic component corresponding to the load at the critical event,
z is the clip gage height and YS is the yield at test temperature.

The Final Result

When the graphical data has been analyzed, the sample measured and examined, and theCTOD value calculated, the
validity of the result must also be evaluated.

As discussed above, some of the validity requirements of the CTOD test cannot be determined until the test is
completed. A value may be obtained, there may be a minimum value of CTOD and/or type of fracture restrained, but,
the test must also be valid. It is possible to have a result with a sufficient value to meet the specification requirement,
but still have an invalid test. Similarly, your result may be lower than required with an invalid test. In these cases, the
result obtained should not be used and the test should be repeated.
Source: Element Materials Technology.

There has been considerable distress when the larger CTOD samples produce results that are lower than experienced
with smaller samples.

Here are a couple of reasons why the larger samples are producing lower results. First, the larger samples put more
material in the plane-strain region of the sample. This means that as the sample is loaded the material at the center of
the fatigue precrack is stressed and unable to neck down because it is restrained by the surrounding material. Typically
on samples with a significant amount of ductility the sides of the sample are drawn in similar to the necking down of a
tensile sample. On larger samples there is more material between the edge and the center which increases the quantity
of material that is not allowed to neck down.

Secondly, as more material is tested there is a greater probability that you will find the weakest link in the material.
Since fracture initiation takes more energy that fracture propagation, a small area that is near the tip of the fatigue
precrack can fracture and the sample can fail. In a larger test sample more material is being sampled.

As with all testing, closer simulation of conditions to which the final product will be exposed produces more accurate
predictions of behavior. In the case of large samples CTOD testing use of samples sizes that resemble the thickness of
the finished product is proving to be important in the prediction of behavior.