Fig. 1.
Comparison of the ductility obtained on the basis of the Kachanov and Manjoine models
Fig. 2.
Compact tension specimen
Tab. 1.
Parameters of CT test [18]
| T [°C] | W [cm] | B (width) [cm] | a [cm] | P [kN] | tf [h] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 550 | 50 | 25 | 16.67 | 19.620 | 40 200 |
Fig. 3.
Finite element mesh with symmetric boundary conditions
Fig. 4.
Comparison of results of the Kachanov model with chosen experimental points of uniaxial tension creep of 316 steel at a temperature of 550°C [14]
Fig. 5.
C*-integral for stationary creep (blue circles), and C(t) for a model with damage (orange squares) as a function of crack length
Fig. 6.
Flowchart of numerical simulation of crack growth
Fig. 7.
Crack growth simulation for stationary creep (solid blue line) and for the creep damage model (dashed orange line) obtained on the basis of FM equations
Fig. 8.
Crack initiation time ti and the time to failure tf as a function of minimum mesh size for local and non-local damage models
Fig. 9.
Simulation of crack growth by local damage model for different mesh sizes (the time scale for mesh size 0.5 mm is ten times greater than for the other meshes)
Fig. 10.
Simulation of crack growth by the non-local damage model for different mesh sizes