Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
DS58
NOTE
This book represents a part of a continuing effort by The Metal Properties Council on
behalf of the engineering community. Individuals and organizations generating additional
information concerning the materials evaluated in this report, or in others in this series,
are urged to make these data available to the Council for incorporation in future
revisions. Address the Council at: The United Engineering Center, 345 East 47th St., New
York, N.Y. 10017.
Related
ASTM Publications
Supplemental Report on the Elevated-Temperature Properties of Chromium-
Molybdenum Steels, DS 6-S2 ( 1971 ), $7 .00, 05-00600240
This publication is made possible by the authors and, also, the unheralded efforts of
the reviewers. This body of technical experts whose dedication, sacrifice of time and
effort, and collective wisdom in reviewing the papers must be acknowledged. The quality
level of ASTM publications is a direct function of their respected opinions. On behalf of
ASTM we acknowledge with appreciation their contribution.
Abstract
Figures 1 thru 6 2
Introduction 8
Yield Strength, Tensile Strength, and Ductility 8
Part 1 3Cr-1Mo 8
Part 2 5Cr-1hMo 9
Part 3 5Cr-1hMo-Si 9
Part 4 5Cr-1hMo-Ti 9
Part 5 7Cr-1hMo 9
Part 6 9Cr-1Mo 9
Creep and Rupture Properties 9
Part 1 3Cr-1Mo 10
Part 2 5Cr-1hMo 11
Part 3 5Cr-1hMo-Si 12
Part 4 5Cr-1hMo-Ti 12
Part 5 7Cr-1hMo 13
Part 6 9Cr-1Mo 13
Choice Between Evaluation Procedures 14
Comparison of Grades 14
Acknowledgments 14
References 15
Tables 16
Figures 7 thru 60 81
Appendix: Specifications Encompassed in Report 207
DS58-EB/Oct. 1975
REFERENCE: Smith, G. V., Evaluation of the The rupture and secondary creep rate data
Elevated Temperature Tensile and Creep Rupture have been evaluated by both direct isothermal inter-
Properties of 3-9 percent Chromium-Molybdenum polation or extrapolation, and by time-temperature
Steels; ASTM Data Series, American Society for parameter, to establish the temperature dependence
Testing and Materials, 1975. of the average and minimum stresses to cause a
secondary creep rate of 0.1 and 0.01 percent per
ABSTRACT: The evaluations of this report cover 6 1000 hours, and of the average and minimum stresses
grades of chromium-molybdenum ste.el of interest to produce rupture in 1000, 10,000 and 100,000
for applications in boilers and pressure vessels: hours.
Elongation and reduction of area data at frac-
3 Cr - 1 Mo 5 Cr - ~ Mo-Ti ture are included for both the short time elevated
temperature tensile tests and for the rupture tests.
5 Cr - ~Mo Summary figures, Figs. 1-6, immediately fol-
lowing this abstract show the temperature depen-
5 Cr - ~ Mo-Si 9 Cr - 1 Mo dence of strength properties for the 6 grades of
steel evaluated in this report. In these illus-
The data that are evaluated include both previ- trations, the yield and tensile strength trend
ously published data and hitherto unpublished data curves have been adjusted so that they corres-
gathered by The Metal Properties Council from con- pond at room temperature to the specified minimum
tributing laboratories. The properties that have values of common ASTM product specifications.
been evaluated include yield strength, tensile The creep and rupture strengths represent the
strength, creep strength and rupture strength. average values for a secondary creep rate of 0.01
In evaluating the yield and tensile strength percent per 1000 hours and rupture in 100,000
data, a normalizing procedure has been employed hours, respectively.
that involves ratioing the elevated temperature Tabular comparisons of the yield strength
strength of a particular lot to the room temper- ratio and tensile strength ratio trend curves for
ature strength of that same lot. The method of the six grades of steel are provided in Table V,
least squares is then employed to define a trend and graphical comparisons are offered in Figs. 57-
curve for the ratio values representing a par- 58.
ticular material grade. Tabular comparisons of the creep and rupture
strengths are provided in Tables VIII through XI,
with graphical comparisons of average 100,000-
hour rupture strengths and average 0.01 percent
per 1000 hour creep strengths in Figs. 59 and 60.
r,
,.
·+-I-+- • t--t-
~- +
++
~-,
-f'I :
2
Pig. 2. Effect of temperature on yield strength, tensile strength,
rupture strength (100,000 hours), and creep strength (0.01~ per
1000 hours) of 5Cr-iMo steel. Yield and tensile strengths have
been adjusted to JO and 60 ksi at 75 P. Rupture and creep strengths
are averages of available data.
3
Pig. J. Effect of temperature on yield strength, tensile strength,
rupture streng!;h (100,000 hours), creep strength (0.01~ per 1000
hours) of 5Cr-itlo-Si steel. Yield and tensile strengths have been
adjusted to JO and 60 ksi at room temperature. Rupture and creep
strengths are aveeages of available data.
4
+ t
5
i
I
+.· ·•
I- .
~:~_.,:;.;c~'~ -
--~-~ rt-
• ;.. •. , -r+-
~
., '
-:;:+
,+
-h
6
..
7
INTRODUCTION
The evaluations presented herein represent another average of duplicate tests. The yield strength
in a series of reports prepared under the sponsor- values represent either 0.2% offset, or the lower
ship of The Metal Properties Council (MPC) in the yield point, which is considered its equivalent.
interests of providing engineering design infor- Elongation at fracture was measured over a 2-inch
mation. Included in the present evaluations are gage length, unless otherwise noted. Plate
6 grades of chromium-molybdenum steel ranging from samples were taken at the quarter thickness position
3 percent to 9 percent chromium, and ~ to 1 per- parallel to the rolling direction, unless other-
cent molybdenum. All are recognized for boiler wise indicated.
and pressure vessel usage. The yield and tensile strength evaluations
The tabular data, charts and the results of were made employing a normalizing procedure which
the evaluations for the six grades have been has proved useful in prior evaluations (e.g., ref-
grouped separately as follows: erences 13-14). This procedure involves ratioing
the elevated temperature yield and tensile
Part 1: 3 Cr - 1 Mo steels strengths of individual heats of a particular grade
of material to the room temperature yield and
Part 2: 5 Cr - ~ Mo steels tensile strengths of the same lots. Then, by the
method of least squares, the best fit curve is
Part 3:· 5 Cr - ~ Mo-Si steels established for each set of such ratios to provide
trend curves in ratio form, defining the variation
Part 4: 5 Cr - ~ Mo-Ti steels of strength with temperature. These character-
istic strength ratio trend curves may then be em-
Part 5: 7 Cr - ~ Mo steels ployed to compute strength-temperature trend
curves for specific room temperature strength
Part 6: 9 Cr - 1 Mo steels levels of interest within the limits represented
by the original data. Of frequent interest are
The data that are evaluated include both data curves anchored to the minimum strength specified
previously published in ASTM's OS Data Series Pub- in the purchase specification (sometimes identi-
lications, Cl,2J and hitherto unpublished data fied as minimum position curves). Experience has
gathered by MPC from cooperating industrial organ- indicated that such a curve may be expected to de-
izations. Data representing different product fine, approximately, a lower boundary for 95 per-
forms, plate, bar, pipe, tube, forging and casting cent of the data when the room temperature data
are included; however, for some grades, the number population spans uniformly the permitted (or ex-
of data representing certain product forms was pected) range of strengths.
limited or completely lacking. Data for weld metal The yield strength, tensile strength and
have been included, but are very limited in number; ductility data for the different grades are plotted
data for weldments have not been included, owing as dependent upon temperature in Figs. 7-12.
to the dependence of their behavior upon unstand-
ardized specific test details, e.g., the relative Part 1: 3 Cr - 1 Mo steels; Figs. 7a, b, c
fractions of base metal, weld metal and heat-
affected-zone encompassed. The yield strength and strength ratio results are
All of the data, including those from refer- plotted in Fig. 7a, the tensile strength and
ences 1 and 2, are identified in Tables 1 and 2 as strength ratio results in Fig. 7b, and the elonga-
to specification number, deoxidation practice, tion and reduction of area results in Fig. 7c.
heat treatment, product form and size, grain size The trend curves for yield and tensile strength
and chemical composition, in so far as these are ratios, developed by the least squares procedure,
known. are shown in the figures and tabulated in Table V.
The properties that have been evaluated in- The quantity of data for this steel at temperatures
clude yield strength, tensile strength, creep between room temperature and 800 F is minimal,
strength and rupture strength. Creep strength has and consequently there exists an uncertainty in
been evaluated at two levels, as the stress caus- the trend curves for this range. Furthermore,
ing a secondary creep rate of 0.1% or 0.01% per some of the yield strength data represent 0.1 per-
1000 hours; rupture strength has been evaluated at cent offset; the ratioed values for these data
1000, 10,000 and 100,000 hours. Since the indi- were nevertheless included in the least squares
vidual strength properties employed in setting al- evaluation, on the assumption that the ratios for
lowable design stress intensities are each-re- 0.1% offset might be expected to approximate those
quired in the temperature range for which they may for 0.2% offset.
govern, the evaluations have been directed towards Most of the data represented plate, in either
developing trend curves that define the variation the normalized and tempered or quenched and temp-
of strength with temperature. ered conditions. There were too few data repre-
Elongation and reduction of area at fracture senting other product forms and heat treatments to
in the tensile and rupture tests are included in warrant endeavoring to distinguish possible effects
the report, where available, and plotted in sum- of these variables, and therefore all of the data
mary figures to reveal trends of behavior. (except those for weld metal) and encompassing
very broad ranges of strength at room temperature,
YIELD STRENGTII, TENSILE STRENGTH. ELONGATION AND were treated as being from the same population.
REDUCTION OF AREA However, this assumption may be unwarranted. The
prior evaluation of the 2~ Cr - 1 Mo steels, with
The original tensile test results, which are pre- which the 3 Cr - 1 Mo grade has generally been
sumed to have been generated at strain rates gen- grouped for ASME Code purposes, revealed a signi-
erally within the limits established in ASTM ficant effect of heat treatment. In spite of the
RecoDD11ended Practice E21, are tabulated in Table data deficiencies for 3 Cr - 1 Mo steel, it is of
III. Many of the reported results represent the interest that the trend curves shown in Figs. 7a
8
and b, and tabulated in Table V, do approximate an the temperature range for which data are lacking
average of the individual curves for 2~ Cr - 1 Mo have been sketched in, guided by the results of
steel. the least squares analyses for the higher temper-
Although excluded from the least squares ature range. Consequently, the trend curves can
analysis (on general grounds), the limited yield only be viewed as very rough approximations be-
and tensile strength data for weld metal fall with- tween room temperature and 700 F. Even at higher
in the scatter bands for the several wrought pro- temperatures, the trend curves must be viewed as
duct forms. approximate, since they are based upon few test
The elongation and reduction of area data are results. Comparison with 5 Cr - '2 Mo steel, Table
plotted in Fig. 7c. Owing to the paucity of data V, reveals that although the derived trend curves
between room temperature and 800 F, the trend of differ importantly, the strength ratio scatter
ductility is poorly defined; above 800 F, ductility bands overlap sufficiently that it is possible
increases with increasing temperature. In asses- that the data for the 5 Cr - '2 Mo-Ti steel could
sing the ductility data, note should be taken that be viewed as belonging to the same population as
the strength at room temperature spans from 70 to that for 5 Cr - ~ Mo.
more than 130 ksi. The one set of weld-metal re- The gap in data between room temperature and
duction of area values falling below the general 700 F al so exists for elongation and reduction of
scatter band, had a tensile strength at room tem- area. Within this limitation, the data exhibit
perature of 127 ksi. Also, a gage length of 1 trends with increasing temperature similar to
inch had been employed for the plate material. those for 5 Cr - '2 Mo.
Part 2: 5 Cr - '2Mo steels; Figs. Sa, b, c Part 5: 7 Cr - '2 Mo steel; Figs. lla, b, c
The yield strength and strength ratio results are Elevated temperature tensile strength results were
shown in Fig. Sa, the tensile strength ratio re- available for only three heats of 7 Cr - '2 Mo
sults in Fig. Sb, and the ductility data in Fig. steel; yield strength results were available for
Be. Trend curves are superimposed upon the only one heat, with a gap between room temperature
strength ratio data in Figs. 8a and Sb, and tab- and 1000 F. The derived trend curves, particularly
ulated in Table V. Weld metal data were again ex- that for yield strength below 1000 F must be view-
cluded from the least squares analysis, although ed as very approximate. When compared with the
the ratio values fall not unreasonably in relation 9 Cr - 1 Mo steel, to be considered next, and for
to the scatter bands for the various product forms; which a somewhat greater number of data were avail-
the latter were treated as though belonging to a able, the differences are not large. The data
single population. Although a wide range of points for weld metal fell within the scatter
strengths is represented in the room temperature bands for the wrought data, all of which repre-
data, inspection of the ratio scatter bands does sented bar.
not suggest any significant effect of strength Elongation and reduction of area values were
level upon the trend curves. available at elevated temperatures for only one
Fig. Sc suggests some slight fall off of heat of wrought material, with no values between
elongation but not of reduction of area at inter- room temperature and 1000 F.
mediate temperatures, before the usually observed
increase at higher temperatures. Part 6: 9 Cr - 1 Mo steel; Figs. 12a, b, c
Part 3: 5 Cr- '2Mo-Si steels; Figs. 9a, b, c The yield and tensile strength ratio trend curves
for 9 Cr - 1 Mo steel appear fairly well defined,
Tensile test results were avilable for 4 heats of although there is not an abundance of data. For
bar and 1 of cast material; inspection of the this material, some of the weld metal strength
strength ratio scatter bands suggested that the ratios fall significantly above the scatter bands
data should be treated as from a common population, representing bar and tube stock.
and this was assumed. It is, of course, possible The ductility data exhibit the same general
that further data would prove the assumption to be trend with increasing temperature as did the other
unwarranted. It is of interest to note that the steels of the present evaluation. The low
tensile strength ratio curve for 5 Cr- '2 Mo-Si ductility values for weld metal represent one lot
steel is substantially identical with that for whose tensile strength at room temperature was
5 Cr - '2 Mo up to 900 F, beyond which the former very high, 130 ksi, tested in the as-welded con-
falls somewhat more rapidly with increasing temp- dition; commonly, a post weld heat treatment would
erature. The yield strength ratio curves cross be imposed.
one another at 550 F, and differ by less than 10
percent at temperatures up to 1000 F. However, CREEP A.\ll RIJPTll!CL PROPERTIES
with so few data for the 5 Cr - '2 Mo-Si steel, it
seems doubtful that the differences are signi- The available creep and rupture test results are
ficant. tabulated in Table IV, separated into 6 parts ac-
In so far as can be judged, the limited cording to nominal grade composition.
ductility data exhibit the same general trend with The rupture data were evaluated to provide
increasing temperature as did the 3 Cr - 1 Mo and rupture strengths corresponding to 1000, 10,000
5 Cr -'2 Mo steels -- essentially flat to about and 100,000 hours; the creep rate data were eval-
800 F, and then increasing. uated to develop creep strengths corresponding to
secondary creep rates of 0.1 and 0.01 percent per
Part 4: 5 Cr - '2 Mo-Ti steel; Figs. lOa, b, c 1000 hours.
The evaluations have been performed by both
For this material, there were no tensile test direct and indirect procedures. The direct pro-
data between room temperature and 700 F, and data cedure involves interpolating or extrapolating
for only 4 heats at 700 F and higher. All of the the isothermal relation between stress and rupture
data were for bar. The ratio trend curves over time, or between stress and secondary creep rate,
9
plotted in either instance, on double logarithmic kept in mind in assessing the degree of scatter of
coordinates. The indirect evaluations employed the the data in Figs. 13-15.
Larson-Miller time-temperature parameter. The
direct evaluations were performed on individual Rupture Strength
lots. The indirect or parameter evaluations were
carried out only on a "universalized" basis assum- The results of the individual lot interpolations
ing a universal value for the parameter constant, or extrapolations are plotted in Figs. 17a-c as
even though it is recognized that the constant may dependent upon temperature and tabulated in Table
vary from lot to lot. As noted in earlier reports VI. The universalized Larson-Miller parameter
in this series, the available data are of such a scatter band (c = 20), representing all test times
character as to preclude individual lot parameter greater than 5 hours, is shown in Fig. 16. In both
evaluations (as would be preferable) on other than Figs. 16 and 17, a distinction is made as to heat
a fraction of the available data. treatment, and thus, indirectly, as to strength at
When the direct evaluations required extra- room temperature. Inspection of the plots re-
polation, this was performed visually, with greater veals that the data representing quenched and tem-
weight given to the longer time or slower-rate pered plate material having a tensile strength at
data. Rupture extrapolations were made only when room temperature exceeding 110 ksi fall in a dis-
it seemed reasonable to assume linearity for the tinctly different region of the plot than do the
longer time data. However, it is recognized that, data for annealed or normalized and tempered
especially at the higher temperatures, a trend to material, for which the tensile strength at room
bilinearity or curvilinearity, downward in either temperature is less than 100 ksi. The data for a
instance, may develop and, if not recognized, lead single lot of quenched and tempered material having
to a non-conservative extrapolation. The log a tensile strength of 91 ksi also fall within this
stress-log secondary creep rate plots frequently second region.
exhibited curvilinearity at slower rates approach- To explore further the relationship between
ing 0.01 percent per 1000 hours, and where extra- rupture strength and room temperature tensile
p0lations were required, these were restricted strength, the results of the individual-lot deter-
generally to not more than one log cycle, and per- minations of 10,000 hour rupture strength (Table
formed with a conservative assessment of the VI) have been plotted (open symbols) in Fig. 18 as
scatter and the curvilinearity. dependent upon tensile strength. Also shown are
The well-known Larson-Miller parameter was em- the few data for rupture in 100,000 hours (filled
ployed in evaluating the rupture data, using, for synbols}. The 10,000 hour data have been assessed
all grades excepting 9 Cr - 1 Mo, the generally by the method of least squares; and the resulting
assumed value of 20 for the constant c: trend lines are shown in Fig. 18. Estimated trend
curves have been drawn visually for the few 100,000
T(20 + log t) hour data, paralleling those for 10,000 hours.
Although the quantity of data are too few,
where T is the temperature in degrees Rankin, t even for rupture in 10,000 hours, to provide more
than an approximate assessment of the average de-
is the time in hours and F1 (s) signifies that the
parameter is a function of the applied stress s. pendence upon room temperature tensile strength, it
Leyda and Rowel6 had reported optimal values of c is clear that these properties are interrelated,
as was previously reported (13,15) for quenched
for individual lots of various grades of steel.
On the basis of these results, a value of c = 20 and tempered 2~ Cr - 1 Mo steel. Rupture strength
increases with increasing room temperature strength,
seems suitable for all except 9 Cr - 1 Mo. For the rate of increase decreasing with increasing
this grade a higher value was indicated, and this
has been confirmed in unpublished work at ORNL,17 temperature, and still faintly evident at 1100 F.
For quenched and tempered 2~ Cr - 1 Mo steel, the
from which the value of C = 25.1 used here was dependence had pretty well washed out by 1000 F.
taken.
The Larson-Miller parameter was also employed The effect of room temperature strength upon
the creep rupture properties has not heretofore
for evaluating the secondary creep rate data in been considered for purposes of establishing ASME
the form: Code allowable stresses, and in fact, the avail-
able data for 3 Cr-Mo steel are inadequate to do
T(20 - log r) so. Analyses have therefore been made of all data
representing other than quenched-and-tempered
where r is the secondary creep rate in percent material (the quenched and tempered condition
per hour. having not yet been recognized by the ASME Code
for service in the creep range), without regard to
Part 1: 3 Cr - 1 Mo steel; Figs. 13-21 room temperature strength, to provide a current
best assessment of creep and rupture strengths for
To show graphically the quantity of available data, purposes of setting allowable stresses, on an
as well as their scatter, all of the time to rup- interim basis. In one of these analyses, the uni-
ture data have been plotted in Figs. 13a-c; all of versalized Larson-Miller data for annealed and nor-
the secondary creep rate data have been plotted in malized and tempered wrought material have been
Figs. 14a-c; and all of the elGngation and reduc- eval11ated by the least squares method to define
tion of area data at rupture have been plotted in the mean curve of best fit; this is shown on Fig.
Figs. lSa-g. Data were available for bar, plate, 16. A minimum curve representing a lower bound
and pipe-tube product forms and for a few lots of for approximately 95 percent of the data is also
weld metal, and are differentiated in the plots. shown, derived as in previous evaluations by sub-
Various heat treatments, including quenching and stracting 1.65 multiples of the standard deviation
tempering, are represented, with a consequent wide from the mean curve. Average and minimum rupture
variation in room temperature strength. Evalua- strengths corresponding to 1000, 10,000 and
tion of the data shows that strength at room temp- 100,000 hours, derived from Fig. 16 are tabulated
erature can exert an important effect upon the in Tables VIII and IX. In a second type of
creep and rupture strengths, and this should be
10
analysis, the rupture strength evaluations of indi- Part 2: 5 Cr - ~Mo steels; Figs. 22-28
vidual lots (excluding quenched and tempered mater-
ial), plotted in Figs. 17a, b and c, have been All of the time for rupture data are plotted in
evaluated by the least squares method; the result- Figs. 22a-c; all of the secondary creep rate data
ing mean and minimum trend curves are shown in the have been plotted in Figs. 23a-c; and all of the
figures and tabulated in Tables VIII and IX. rupture ductility data have been plotted in Figs.
The average rupture strengths derived by the 24a-f.
parameter analysis are superimposed upon Figs. 17a-
c for comparison with the results by individual lot Rupture Strength
analysis. Inspection of the plots reveals gener-
ally good agreement, with the greatest differences The universalized Larson-Miller parameter scatter
not exceeding about 10%. The differences in min- band (c = 20), representing all rupture times ex-
inum rupture strength, Table IX, are of the same ceeding 5 hours, is plotted as Fig. 25; the results
order. of the individual lot interpolations or extra-
With the master parameter curve, it is also polations are tabulated in Table Vl and plotted in
possible to compute the isothermal log stress-log Figs. 26a-c. In either instance, the data for lot
rupture time curves to permit a visual test of how 2-9, having a tensile strength at room temperature
well the computed curves represent the test data. of 126 ksi is clearly separated from data for the
Such computed isothermal trend curves are super- remaining wrought materials; consequently, data
imposed upon the plots of Figs. 13a-c. However, for this lot have been excluded from the various
there are too few data to form a judgment. regression analyses related to Figs. 25 and 26.
The few data for cast material fell within the
Creep Strength scatter band for wrought material and were in-
cluded in the regression analyses.
The results of the individual lot interpolations or Examination of the wrought data, other than
extrapolations to define creep strengths corres- lot 2-9, reveals no effect of room temperature
ponding to secondary creep rates of 0.1 and 0.01% tensile strength upon elevated temperature rupture
per 100 hours are included in Table VII, and are strength (10,000 or 100,000 hours). However, there
plotted in Fig. 20. The universalized Larson- are too few test results at temperatures below
Miller secondary creep-rate parameter scatter band 1200 F to warrant drawing a general conclusion to
is shown in Fig.19. Again, it is clear that, as that effect. At 1200 F, no effect of room tempera-
with rupture strength, creep strength depends upon ture strength level is evident. Accordingly evalu-
tensile strength_ at room temperature. Accordingly, ations for rupture strength have been performed
a mean trend curve was developed for other-than- for all data other than lot 2-9 and weld metal on
quenched-and-tempered material; this is shown in the assumption of a common population.
Fig. 19, together with a minimum trend curve der- The temperature dependencies of the individual
ived, as previously, from the mean curve. lot interpolations or extrapolations have been
From the individually evaluated data of Fig. examined by the method of least squares, and the
20, mean trend curves were developed, as shown. resulting lines of best fit are superimposed upon
However, there were too few data to warrant devel- the plots of Figs. 26a-c. Rupture strengths cor-
oping minimum values, nor, in fact for placing much responding to 1000, 10,000 and 100,000 hours taken
confidence in the mean trend curves. Even so, the from these trend curves are included in Table VIII.
mean curves agreed reasonably well with trend Minimum rupture strengths derived, as previously
curves computed from the mean master parameter described, from the mean curves are also shown in
curve of Fig. 19 and also shown in Fig. 20. Be- the plots, and included in Table IX.
cause of the relatively few individual lot data, Superimposed upon the parameter scatter band
greater confidence should probably be placed in (Fig. 25) is the mean curve of best fit for the
the parameter result. The trend curves are pro- data as determined by the method of least squares.
vided in tabular form in Table X. Also shown is a minimum curve derived from the
From the mean master parameter curve (exclud- mean by substracting 1.65 multiples of the stand-
ing quenched and tempered material}, the isothermal ard deviation. From the mean curve, rupture
log stress versus log secondary creep curves have strengths corresponding to 1000, 10,000 and 100,000
been computed, and are superimposed upon the data hours have been computed, and the resulting trend
plots of Figs. 14a-c. The computed curves are in curves have been superimposed up~n the plots of
conformity with the data. Figs. 26a-c, and included in Table VllI. The
The individual lot estimates of creep. strength trend curves agree well with those derived from
(0.1 percent per 1000 hours) have been plotted the individual lot evaluations. Minimum rupture
versus tensile strength at room temperature in Fig. strength values have also been derived from the
21. The trends are similar to those evident in minimum curve of Fig. 25. These values are in-
Fig. 18 for rupture strength. There were too few cluded in the summary comparison of Table IX, and
data for creep strength (0.01 percent) to warrant on the whole, agree well with those developed by
plotting. individual lot analysis.
A final comparison may be made by computing
Rupture Ductility the isothermal log stress versus log time for
rupture curves from the mean curve of Fig. 25, and
Relatively few data were available for other than superimposing the results upon Figs. 22a-c. The
plate material and hence the trends of behavior computed curves agree satisfactorily with the
for other than quenched and tempered material can- wrought data (excluding lot 2-9, as discussed pre-
not be identified. The higher strength, quenched viously}.
and tempered plate material exhibited a trend to
reduced ductility at longer times, suggesting
possible notch rupture sensitivity. Creep Strength
11
or extrapolations assessing average creep strengths by the two evaluation procedures. This is es-
corresponding to 0.1 and 0.01 percent per 1000 pecially noteworthy in view of the relatively
hours are included in Table VII and plotted in small number of available data.
Figs. 28a and b. Excluding the data for lot 2-9, The average parameter trend curve of Fig. 32
as discussed previously, the temperature variations has also provided a basis for computing the iso-
of creep strength were developed by the method of thermal log stress-log time for rupture curves
least squares and are shown in Figs. 28a and b and that are superimposed in Figs. 29a-c upon the
included in Table X (mean values). available data. Good agreement is evident.
The universalized Larson-Miller secondary
creep rate parameter scatter band is shown in Fig. Creep Strength
27, with superimposed average and minimum trend
curves. From the average curve, creep strengths The individual lot evaluations for creep strength
corresponding to secondary creep rates of 0.1 and (O.l and 0.01 percent per 1000 hours) are included
0.01 percent per 1000 hours have been computed and in Table VII and are plotted in Fig. 35. Average
these are superimposed on Figs. 28a and b, and in- trend curves developed by the method of least
cluded in Table X. Close agreement is evident be- squares are also shown in Fig. 35 and included in
tween the creep strengths developed by the indi- Table X.
vidual lot and parameter evaluation procedures, The universalized Larson-Miller secondary
particularly for 0.01 percent per 1000 hours. creep rate parameter scatter band for 5 Cr - Y, Mo-Si
From the average trend curve for the parameter steel is shown in Fig. 34. Mean and minimum trend
scatter band, isothermal log stress-log secondary curves, excluding data for castings, have been
creep curves have been computed, and these are superimposed upon the plot. Creep strengths cor-
shown superimposed on the isothermal scatter bands, responding to secondary creep rates of 0.1 and
Figs. 23a, b and c. Reasonably good agreement is 0.01 percent per 1000 hours have been computed
evident. also from the mean master parameter curve and
Minimum creep strengths have been computed these are plotted in Figs. 35a and b and included
for both the individual lot data and the parameter- in Table X. The creep strength vs temperature
ized data, by the method described previously, and trend curves by individual lot and by parameter
are included in Table XI. evaluations are in fair (0.1%) to good (0.01%)
agreement.
Rupture Ductility From the master parameter curve, isothermal
log stress vs secondary creep rate curves have
Except at 1200 F, there were relatively few data, been computed, and these are superimposed upon the
especially for reduction of area. At 1200 F, a scatter bands, Figs. 3.0a-c. Reasonably good con-
slight tendency for lower ductility at longer rup- formity with the few data is evident.
ture time may be detected. The ductility of the Minimum creep strengths have also been de-
high strength lot 2-9 falls on the low side rela- veloped by the two evaluation procedures and are
tive to other wrought material. included in Table XI. As expected on the basis
of the few data available, larger differences are
Part 3: 5 Cr - ~ Mo-Si steels; Figs. 29-35 observed than is evident for the average values.
The time for rupture data are plotted in Figs. Rupture Ductility
29a-c, the secondary creep rate data in Figs. 30a-
c, and the rupture ductility data in Figs. 3la-f. The relatively few ductility data show good rupture
ductility within the restricted time and tempera-
Rupture Strength ture limits that they represent.
The universalized Larson-Miller rupture parameter Part 4: 5 Cr - Y, Mo-Ti steels; Figs. 36-42
scatter band (c = 20) is shown as Fig. 32. Inspec-
tion reveals that the few data for castings fell The time-for-rupture data are plotted in Figs.
outside the scatter band of data for wrought metal. 36a-c, the secondary creep rate data in Figs.
Within this latter category, there is no evidence 37a-b and the rupture ductility data in Figs.
for an effect of room temperature strength level 38a-b. The number of data are extremely sparse
upon rupture strength (or creep strength), but it except for temperatures of 1000 and 1200 F.
should be noted, Fig. 9b, that the limited data
did not encompass a significant range in room temp- Rupture Strength
erature strength. Average and minimum t~end
curves for wrought metal, by the method of least The universalized Larson-Miller rupture parameter
squares, have been superimposed upon the data scatter band (c = 20) is shown in Fig. 39. All of
scatter band. the data represent wrought material. However, in-
The individual lot rupture strength evalua- spection of Fig. 39 reveals that the data are
tions are plotted against temperature in Figs. 33a- poorly distributed, and it seems possible that the
c with superimposed best fit average and minimum data population might be mixed, or perhaps that
trend curves. Tabulated values for the individual there is important microstructural instability.
lot evaluations are included in Table VI. Rupture The limited tensile strength data at room tempera-
strengths derived from the trend curves are in- ture, Fig. lOb, show only a very limited range in
cluded in Tables VIII and IX. Also superimposed values and therefore offer no explanation. The
upon Figs. 33a-c are average rupture strength least squares analysis of the data showed minimum
curves computed from the average trend curve for variance for the third order, but such a trend
the parameterized data plot of Fig. 32. These curve appeared unreasonable in shape, presumably
values as well as minimum values not shown in Figs. reflecting the particular data distribution; ac-
33a-c, are tabulated in Tables VIII and IX. Com- cordingly the data were forced to a quadratic fit,
parison of the average trend curves of Figs. 33a-c with slightly greater variance. This trend curve
shows very good agreement in the results developed is shown superimposed upon the data. A minimum
12
curve derived from the average is also shown. Rupture Strength
The individual lot rupture strength evalua-
tions are plotted in Figs. 40a-c and are included The universalized Larson-Miller rupture parameter
in Table VI. With the individual lot values scatter band (c = 20) is plotted in Fig. 46. The
bunched at the two temperatures 1000 and 1200 F, data appear reasonably distributed in contrast with
the least squares evaluation not surprisingly in- the scatter for 5 Cr - ~Mo-Ti steel. Average and
dicated a nonlinear interrelation between the var- minimum trend lines have been superimposed upon the
iables, which, on inspection, seemed unreasonable. data of Fig. 46.
lt therefore seemed best to force a linear relation, The individual lot rupture strength evalua-
and accordingly the average and minimum trend tions are tabulated in Table Vl and plotted in
curves for the individual lots shown in Figs. 40a-c Figs. 47a-c. Average and minimum rupture strength
and included in Tables VIII and IX reflect this vs temperature trend lines are superimposed upon
arbitrary decision. Also superimposed upon Figs. the data and included in Tables VIII and IX. Also
40a-c are average trend curves computed from the plotted in Figs. 47a-c are average trend curves
master parameter trend curve of Fig. 39. These computed from the master parameter trend curve of
values, as well as minimum values not shown in Fig. 46. These values, as well as minimum values
Figs. 40a-c, are included in Tables Vlll and IX. not plotted in Fig. 46, are included in Tables
In view of the poor character and quantity of the Vlll and IX. Comparison of the average trend
data and the arbitrary judgments concerning the curves of Figs. 47a-c shows very good agreement
least squares analyses, the agreement between the between the results developed by the two evalua-
results by the two evaluation procedures is good. tion procedures.
From the average parameter trend curve of Isothermal log stress vs log time for rupture
Fig. 39, isothermal log stress vs log time for curves have also been computed from the average
rupture curves have been computed and are super- parameter trend curve of Fig. 46, and these are
imposed upon the data plots of Figs. 36a-c. At superimposed upon the plots of Figs. 43a-c. Good
1000 F, agreement is poor; this is also evident in conformity is evident.
Fig. 40a, where the individual lot evaluations
should be accurate since they involve principally Creep Strength
interpolation on the isothermal plot. On this
argument, the strength-temperature regression for The universalized Larson-Miller secondary creep
the individual lots in Fig. 3 has also given a too- rate scatter band is plotted in Fig. 48 with
conservative result. superimposed average and minimum trend curves.
The individual lot creep strength evaluations
Creep Strength are tabulated in Table VII and plotted in Fig. 49.
Average and minimum trend curves for the limited
The universalized Larson-Miller secondary creep data are superimposed on the data of Fig. 49 and
rate parameter scatter band is shown in Fig. 41, included in Tables X and XI. Average and minimum
from which it is evident that the number of data trend curves were also computed from the master
is quite limited. Average and minimum trend curves parameter trend curves of Fig. 48. The average
are superimposed upon the data. and minimum values are included in Tables X and
The individual lot creep strength evaluations XI. The average values have also been plotted in
are tabulated in Table VII and plotted in Fig. 42. Fig. 49 for comparison with the individual lot
Average and minimum trend curves, by the least trend curves. Agreement is fairly good for 0.1%
squares procedure, are superimposed upon the data, per 1000 hours but poor for 0.01% per 1000 hours
and tabulated in Tables X and XI. Little confi- at temperatures above about 1050 F. Finally, the
dence can be attached to the trend curves since master parameter curve has permitted computing
there are so few data. (For this same reason, the isothermal log stress vs secondary creep rate
trend curves were arbitrarily forced to a linear curves, and these have been superimposed on Figs.
variation.) Also superimposed upon the plots of 44a-b. They are in reasonable conformity with the
Fig. 42 are computed average trend curves by the data.
parameter evaluation procedure, which probably
warrant more confidence than the individual lot Rupture Ductility
trend curves. These average creep strengths by
the parameter procedure as well as minimum values, The relatively few data exhibit no evidence for im-
not plotted, are included in Tables X and Xl. paired ductility within the restricted limits
Isothermal log stress vs log secondary creep represented.
rate curves, computed from the master parameter
curve, Fig. 41, are superimposed upon Figs. 37a-b. Part 6: 9 Cr - 1 Mo steel; Figs. 50-56
Rupture Ductility The time for rupture data are plotted in Figs.
50a-c, the secondary creep rate data in Figs.
Only scattered data are available at temperatures 5la-c, and the rupture data in Figs. 52a-d.
other than 1000 and 1200 F. At these two tempera-
tures, elongation remained good at the longest Rupture Strength
test times, none of which, however, exceeded 6000
hours. The universalized Larson-Miller rupture scatter
band, (using a value of 25.1 for the constant, for
Part 5: 7 Cr - ~Mo steel; Figs. 43-49 reasons cited earlier) is shown as Fig. 53, with
superimposed average and minimum trend curves.
The time-for-rupture data for 7 Cr - ~ Mo steel The individual lot rupture strength evalua-
are plotted in Figs. 43a-c, the secondary creep tions are included in Table VI and plotted in
rate data in Figs. 44a-b, and the rupture ductility Figs. 54a-c. Average and minimum trend curves
data in Figs. 45a-e. The relatively few data have been superimposed upon the plots, and tabular
represent bar or tube product forms. values included in Tables Vlll and lX. Average
13
trend lines have been computed from the master 100,000 hours, of interest for setting allowable
parameter curve of Fig. S3, and are also super- stresses under the ASME Code, the average values
imposed upon the plots of Figs. S4a-c. Tabular for other grades were sometimes more conservative
values for these average curves and also for min- by the one procedure and sometimes by the other,
imum trend curves, not plotted in Figs. S4a-c, are and similarly for minimum rupture strength. Thus,
included in Tables VIII and IX. The agreement be- the choice between the results by the two pro-
tween the average trend curves developed by the cedures is not, on this basis, readily apparent.
individual lot and parameter evaluation procedures However, the parameter procedure does suffer from
is increasingly poor below about 1100 F as the ref- the disadvantage that it cannot provide 100,000
erence time is extended beyond 1000 hours. Since hour values at the higher test temperatures, un-
the discrepancy is such that the parameter pro- less a hazardous extrapolation of the master para-
cedure produces the more conservative result, one meter curve is made. This disadvantage derives
possible explanation for the discrepancy is that a from the tradeoff between short time at higher
strengthening reaction occurs at lower temperature temperature and longer time at low temperature
that is not influential at the higher temperatures, that is inherent in the time-temperature parameter.
an inherent and well-recognized possible complica- As a consequence, 100,000 hour strengths towards
tion of the parameter evaluation procedure. In the top of the temperature range of practical
this connection, it is of interest that the secon- interest cannot be developed unless tests are made
dary creep rate parameter scatter band to be dis- at even higher temperature. Such tests have seldom
cussed later, Fig. SS, does exhibit an unusual been included in the data gathered by MPC. Prin-
upward concavity. Perhaps a greater volume of cipally for this reason, then, it seems that the
rupture data representing lower parameter values choice between evaluation procedures for 100,000
would have resulted in an appropriately modified hour rupture strength should favor the individual
master parameter curve for rupture. lot procedure.
Isothermal log ~tress vs log_ time for rupture
curves have been computed from the average para- Creep Strength
meter trend curve of Fig. S3, and these have been
superimposed upon the plots of Figs. SOa-c. With In general, there was good agreement between the
reference to the discussion of the preceding para- results by the two evaluation procedures, and no
graph, it is of interest that the computed curves readily apparent basis for choosing between them.
fall below the data at 1000 and 900 F, but, of However, in contrast with 100,000 rupture strength
course, the data are few in number. for which extrapolation in time is always involved,
evaluation of the secondary creep rate data for
Creep Strength the stress for 0.01% per 1000 hours may involve
data interpolation, and parameter methods serve an
The universalized Larson-Miller secondary creep important purpose in correlating data. Also, there
rate parameter scatter band is shown in Fig. SS, were often relatively few creep rate data, such
with superimposed average trend curve. As cited that, for example, creep strength (0.01 percent
above, this trend curve has an uncommon upward per 1000 hours) could not be appraised at tempera-
concavity. tures below 1000 F for several of the grades.
The individual lot creep strength evaluations For these reasons, it has seemed best, on the
are t.abulat.ed in Table Vll, and plotted in Fig. 56. whole, to favor the parameter result for the stress
Average and minimum trend curves, which exhibited to cause a secondary creep rate of 0.01 percent
least variance for the first order interdependence per 1000 hours.
of the variables, are shown superimposed upon the
data, Fig. S6, and are included in tabular form in COMPARISON OF GRADES
Tables X and XI. Also superimposed upon the plots
of Fig. S6 are average trend curves computed from The yield and tensile strength ratio trend curves
the master parameter curve. These average values of the six grades of steel are compared in Figs.
as well as mininrum values, not plotted in Fig. S6, S7 and SS. In either instance, there is no orderly
are tabulated in Tables X and XI. The agreement trend evident for the dependence upon alloy con-
between the average values in Fig. S6 are fair for tent. Differences are sometimes small, as for
the 0.1% per 1000 hour rate, good for the 0.01% examples amongst grades 21, S, Sb and 9 for yield
per 1000 hour rate at 1000 and 1100 F, but diver- strength ratios at temperatures between 7S and
gent at higher temperatures. 700 F, and may not be stat.ist.ically meaningful.
A comparison of computed isothermal curves The average rupture strengths (100,000 hours)
with the test data is afforded by Figs. Sla-c. of the 6 grades are compared in Fig. S9 and the
Reasonable conformity is evident. average creep strengths (0.01% per 1000 hours) in
Fig. 60. Here, there is a measure of orderliness,
Rupture Ductility with the 9 Cr - 1 Mo and 3 Cr - 1 Mo grades ex-
hibiting greater strength than the S to 7 Cr - ~ Mo
Within the limits of the data, extending to beyond grades (except at the highest temperatures in the
10,000 hours at several temperatures, ductility is case of creep strength). Again, the extent to
maintained at greater than 20 percent elongation. which the differences are significant is uncertain.
14
References 17. Oak Ridge National Laboratory; unpublished
work of P. Rittenhouse.
1. W. F. Sinunons and H. C. Cross: Report of the
Elevated-Temperature Properties of Chromium-
Molybdenum Steels; ASTM STP No. 151 (1953).
9. U. S. Steel Corp.
15
Table I
Identification of Steels
A.STM Ref.
Code Spec. Deoxid. Heat (l) Product Code
G:aiy 2 )
No. No. Pr act. Treatment Form-Size Size Ref. No.
Part 1 - 3 Cr - 1 Mo steels
Part 2 - 5 Cr - 12 Mo steels
16
Table I - page 2
ASTM Ref.
Code Spec. Deoxid. Heat Product Grain Code
No. No. Pr act. Treatment Form-Size Size Ref. No.
* Same as 2-3b
**
Categorized as 1% Si steel in Ref. 1.
***
Categorized as 1.5% Si steel in Ref. 1.
17
Table I - page 3
ASTM Pef.
Code Spec. Deoxid. Heat Product Grain Code
No. No. Pract. Treatment Form-Size Size Ref. No .
1,
Part 5 - 7 Cr - ·2 Mo steels
18
Table I - page 4
ASTM Ref.
Code Spec. Deoxid. Heat Product Grain Code
No. No. Pr act. Treatment Form-Size Size Ref. No.
Part 6 - 9 Cr - 1 Mo steels
19
Table II
Part 1 - 3 Cr - 1 Mo steels
Part 2 -s Cr - ~ Mo steels
20
Table II - page 2
Part s - 7 Cr - ~ Mo steels
21
Table II - page 3
Other
Code No. c Mn p s Si Cr Ni Mo Cu Al Ti
Part 6 - 9 Cr - 1 Mo steels
22
Table II - page 4
23
Table III
Part 1 - 3 Cr - 1 Mo steels
24
Table III - page 2
25
Table III - page 3
26
Table III - page 4
1000~ Percent
Test - --
Code No. Temp. OF Yield Strength Tensile Streneth Elong. ned. Area
-
2-6c 80 37.7 70.2 34. 73.
1000 17 .1 41.3 46. 80.
1100 IS.I 32.S 4S. 86.
1200 12.6 2S.l 67. 87.
2-6d 80 S7.3 80.2 30. 76.
2-6e 80 S7.0 79.6 32. 73.
2-6f 80 37.1 70.6 28. 60.
2-7 80 31.S 72.7 3S. 68.
900 28.S S7.0 2S. 62.
2-8 75 26.2 66.5 39. 81.
7SO 21. 0 Sl.8 30. 77.
900 19.6 48.4 28. 77.
1000 17.3 44.S 28. 74.
1100 lS.4 34.4 38. 87.
1200 11. 3 2S .8 46. 91.
1300 9.S 19.0 6S. 95.
1400 7.2 13.3 6S. 96.
2-9 7S 104.6 126.4 20. 63.
6SO 110.4 17. 61.
7SO 89.8 106.6 17. 63.
8SO 84.9 99.0 22. 68.
9SO 74.1 84.8 27. 77.
lOSO 62.0 7S.6 27. 80.
1100 S0.2 67.0 27. 83.
2-10 80 26.S 70.S 37. 74.
2-11 70 31.0 71.0 37. 77.
300 6S.O 32. 7S.
soo 61.0 30. 73.
700 S7 .s 30. 73.
900 19.S SO.S 34. 7S.
1100 16.S 33.S 44. 87.
1300 11.0 18.0 66. 9S.
lSOO 9.0
2-12 70 73.0 87.3 20. 41.
2-13 70 81.0 103 .s 21. 46.
2-14 70 87.1 109 .s 20. 41.
2-17 70 71.0 99.S 19. 34.
800 S4.S 73.0 19. 49.
1000 44.0 SS.S 30. 7S.
1200 10.0 3S.2 29. 81.
2-2la 80 27 .3 71.3 3S. 72.
1200 13.S 28.0 S7. 90.
2-2lb 1200 14.S 26.S 62. 89.
2-22a 80 32.S 76.3 33. 72.
1200 14.8 29 .o S3. 92.
2-22b 1200 lS.6 29.0 SS. 91.
2-23a 80 29.S 73.4 3S. 69.
1200 14. 3 27.8 S4. 92.
27
Table 111 - page 5
28
Table III - page 6
29
Table III - page 7
Part S - 7 Cr - 1i Mo steels
30
Table III - page 8
1000~ Percent
Test ----
Code No. TemE· OF Yield Strength Tensile Strength Elong. Red. Area
5-2 70 80.0
300 77.5
500 73.0
700 65.0
900 52.5
1100 32.5
1300 15.5
5-3 75 42.9 76.4 37. 74.
800 54 .o
900 44.7
1000 33.1
1100 27.7
1200 17. 3
1300 10.9
5-4 80 83.5 36. 77.
\\'5-8a 70 105.0 139.5 10.5 24.
1100 50.8 58.9 21. 80.
W5-8b 70 84. 7 97.1 25. 70.
1100 44.7 47.2 25. 86.
Part 6 - 9 Cr - 1 Mo steel
31
Table III - page 9
32
Table IV
Test At RuEture
Stress- Duration- Min. Creep
Code No. Temp. OF ksi Hours * Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
Part 1 - 3 Cr - 1 Mo steels
33
Table IV - page 2
Test
At Rupture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. TemE· OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
34
Table IV - page 3
Test
Stress- Min. Creep At Rupture
Duration
Code No. TemE. OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
35
Table IV - page 4
Test
At Rupture
Stress- L>uration Min. Creep
Code No. TemE· OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
36
Table IV - page S
Test
Stress- Duration Min. Creep At Rupture
Code No. Temp. OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. ~o Elong. % Red. Area
Part 2 - 5 Cr - Y, Mo steels
37
Table IV - page 6
Test
Stress- Duration Min. Creep At RuEture
Code No. TemE· OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
38
Table IV - page 7
Test
At Rupture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. TemE· OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
39
Table IV - page 8
Test
Min. Creep A.t Ru:Eture
Stress- Duration
Code No. TemE. OF ksi Hours Hate-%/hr. % Elon~. % Red. Area
40
Table IV - page 9
Test
At RuEture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. Temp. OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elon~. % Red. Area
41
Table IV - page 10
Test
Stress- Duration Min. Creep At Ru£ture
Code No. TemE· OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
42
Table IV - page 11
Test
At RuEture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. Temp. OF ksi Hours Rate-~•/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
43
Table IV - page 12
Test
J\t RuEture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. Te!!!E· OF ksi !lours Rate-%/hr. % Elon~. % Red. Area
44
Table IV - page 13
Test
Duration Min. Creep At Rupture
Stress-
Code No. Temp. OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
45
Table IV - page 14
Test
At Rupture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. TemE· OF ksi Hours Ratc-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
46
Table IV - page IS
Test
At Rupture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. Temp. OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elons. % Red. Area
47
Table IV - page 16
Test
Stress- Duration Min. Creep At RuEture
Code No. Te!!!£· OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
Part S - 7 Cr - % Mo steels
48
Table IV - page 17
Test
At Rupture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. Te~. OF ksi Hours Rate-\/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
49
Table IV - page 18
Test
~ture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. TemE· OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
50
Table IV - page 19
Test
Stress- Duration Min. Creep At RuEture
Code No. TemE· OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
Part 6 - 9 Cr - 1 Mo steels
51
Table IV - page 20
Test
At nu12ture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. Te!!!E· OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
52
Table IV - page 21
Test
At Rupture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. Temp. OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
53
Table IV - page 22
Test
Duration At Ru;Eture
Stress- Min. Creep
Code No. Temp. OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
54
. Table IV - page 23
Test
At Rupture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. Te!J2· OF ksi Hours Rate-%/hr. % Elons. % Red. Area
55
Table IV - page 24
Test
At Rupture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. TemE· •p ksi Hours Rate-\/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
56
Table IV - page 25
Test
At RuEture
Stress- Duration Min. Creep
Code No. Te!!!!!· OF ksi Hours Rate-\/hr. % Elong. % Red. Area
57
Table Va
75 l. 0 1.0 l. () l. 0 l. 0 1.0
* The quantity of <lata for 3 Cr - l ~-lo steel at temperatures hetween room-temperature and
800 Fis minimal, with consequent imprecision in the trend ratios.
( ) Approximate values for temperature ranges for which there were no test results.
58
Table Vb
* The quantity of data for 3 Cr - 1 Mo steel at temperatures between room temperature and
800 Fis minimal, with a consequent imprecision in the trend ratios.
Approximate values for temperature range for which there were no test results.
59
Table VI
Individual lleats
Code No. 8SO 900 9SO 1000 lOSO 1100 llSO 1200
Part 1 - 3 Cr - 1 Mo steels
1000 hours
10,000 hours
1-1 10.2
1-3 24 .0 11. 2 s.o
1-S 13.7 7.4 4.0
1-6 11.0 8.0
l-7a 19.S 9.S
l-7c 69.0 49.0 46.0 3S. 0
l-7d 43.0 30.0 18.S 9.8
l-8a ss.o 43.0
l-8b 41.0 31.S 12.0
l-8c 29.0 16.0 10.3
Wl-10 60.0 49.0
100,000 hours
60
Table VI - page 2
Code No. 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1200 1300 1500
Part 2 - 5 Cr - ~ Mo steels
1000 hours
10,000 hours
100,000 hours
61
Table VI - page 3
Code No. 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1200 1300 1500
2-22a 3.5
2-22b 3.3
2-23a 2.8
2-24 3.4
2-25 2.4
W2-32 2.8
Code No. 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1500
1000 hours
10,000 hours
100,000 hours
Code No. 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1300
1000 hours
62
Table VI - page 4
Code No. 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1300
10,000 hours
Code No. 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1200 1300 1500
Part 5 - 7 Cr - 12 Mo steels
1000 hours
63
Table VI - page 5
Code No. 900 950 1000 1050 llOO 1200 1300 1500
10 1 000 hours
100,000 hours
5-4 8.7
5-5 7.8 3.7 2.8
5-6 7.4 4.8 2.9 1.4
5-7 2.8
Part 6 - 9 Cr - 1 Mo steels
1000 hours
64
Table VI - page 6
Code No. 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1300 1500
6-34 9.8
6-35 11.0
6-36 10.6
6 37 10.5
6-39 8.6
6-40 10.8
6-41 10.6
6-42 10.5
6-43 1\).4
6-44 10.1
6-45 IO.I
6-46 9.7
6-47 10.4
6-48 10. 1
6-49 IO. 0
6-50 10.6
6-51 10.2
6-52 9.5
6-53 IO. 2
6-54 10.1
6-55 10.3
6-56 10.3
6-57 10.4
6-58 10.8
6-59 10.7
6-60 IO. 3
6-61 10.1
6-62 9.9
6-63 10 .1
6-64 10.6
6-65 11. 2
6-66 10.0
6-67 10.2
6-69 9,0
6-70 9.3
10,000 hours
65
Table VI - page 7
Code No. 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1200 1300 1500
100,000 hours
6-1 11. 1 1. 7
6-3 5.8 1.9
6-5 36.0 10.0 2.7
6-11 5.7
6-12 5.1
6-13 5.1
6-16 11.9 6.2 3.1 n. 76
6-17 14. 1 7.6 3.4 1.0
6-66 5.5
6-67 s.s
66
Table VII
Code No. 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1200
Part 1 - 3 Cr - 1 Mo steels
Part 2 - 5 Cr - Y, Mo steels
67
Table VII - page 2
Code No. 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1200
Code No. 850 900 950 1000 1100 1200 1250 1300 1500
68
Table VII - page 3
Code No. 8SO 900 9SO 1000 lOSO 1100 llSO 1200 1300
Part 5 - 7 Cr - %! Mo steels
Part 6 - 9 Cr - 1 Mo steels
69
Table VII - rage 4
Code No. 850 900 950 1000 1050 ] 100 1150 1200 1300
·----
0.01% ;eer 1000 hours
6-1 5.6 2. l 0. 85
6-3 3.4 l. 25
6-4 4.0 1.5
6-8 15.0
6-9 3.5
6-11 4.2
6-17 5.0 2.2
6-21 3.7 1.2
6-22 7.5 3.6
70
Table VIiia
3 Cr - 1 Mo ( l) 5 Cr - lz Mo 5 Cr - !7 Mo-Si
Temp. OF Individ. Parameter Individ. Parameter lndivid. Parameter
800 51. 0
850 49.5 44.0 32.1
900 37.5 36.8 29.8 27.0 26.5
950 28.5 29.0 23.0 22.2 22.8 22.0
1000 21.5 22.0 17.9 18.0 17.1 17.5
1050 16.3 16.3 14.0 14.2 12.8 13.5
1100 12.4 12.0 10.8 11.1 9.5 10.1
1150 9.3 8.9 8.4 8.6 7.1 7.4
1200 7.05 6.5 6.5 6.6 5.3 5.4
1250 4.8 5.1 4.9 4.0 4.0
1300 3.9 3.7 2.9 2.9
5 Cr - lz Mo-Ti 7Cr-lzMo 9 Cr - 1 Mo
Temp. OF lndivid. Parameter Individ. Parameter Individ. Parameter
71
Table VIIIh
5Cr-~Mo-Ti 7 Cr - !-;; Mo 9 Cr - 1 no
Temp. OF lndivid. Parameter Individ. Parameter Individ. Parameter
72
Table VIiie
5 Cr - Yi Mo-Ti 7 Cr - !2 Mo 9 Cr - 1 ~
73
Table IXa
3 Cr - 1 Mo (l) 5 Cr - 12 Mo 5 Cr - % Mo-Si
Te!'.E. •p Individ. Parameter Individ. Parameter Individ. Parameter
800 42.5
850 39.5 37.0 25.2
900 30.0 30.3 24. 0 21.1 20.8
950 22.5 23.8 18.7 17.5 17.7 17.2
1000 17.1 18.1 14.6 14.1 13 .1 13.6
1050 13.0 13.3 11. 3 11. i 9.8 10.5
1100 9.8 9.9 8.8 8.7 7.4 7.9
1150 7.4 7.3 6.8 6.8 5.5 5.8
1200 5.7 5.4 5.3 5.2 4.2 4.3
1250 4.0 4.1 3.8 3.1 3.1
1300 3.2 2.9 2.3 2.3
74
Table IXb
3 Cr - 1 ~(l) 5 Cr - Y, Mo 5 Cr - Y, Mo-Si
Temp. •F Individ. Parameter Individ. Parameter In<livid. Parameter
75
Table lXc
76
Table Xa
Summary Comparison of Average Creep Strengths - 0.1% per 1000 Hours (ksi)
77
Table Xh
Summary Comparison of Average Creep Strengths - 0.01% per 1000 !lours (ksi)
78
Table Xia
Sunnary Comparison of Minimum Creep Strengths - 0.1% per 1000 Hours (ksi)
3Cr-1Mo(l) 5 Cr - ~ Mo 5 Cr - !2 Mo-Si
Temp. OF Individ. Parameter Indivi<l. Parameter lndivid. Parameter
5 Cr - ~ Mo-Ti 7 Cr - ~ Mo 9 Cr - 1 ~lo
79
Table Xlb
Summary Comparison of Minimum Creep Strengths - 0.01% per 1000 Hours (ksi)
S Cr - 12 Mo- Ti 7 Cr - 12 Mo 9 Cr - 1 ~·IO
80
Figure 7a. Variation of yield strength of JCr-lMo steel with
temperature.
81
Figure 7b. Variation of tensile strength of JCr-lMo steel
with temperature.
82
Va:riat ton of d~n~at i'r:iin i~n·~. if"!!!'~~-~~)t ~·\}in
3Cr-1Mo steel with temperature.
83
V1~!l"'i1~t1."1':!'li ;;:if yi!l[fld
with temperature.
84
with temperature.
85
. . ,,, 'b.Jd::!rt ,~:f •!ii!:'ton~·atia:r!i and r-.e';
5Cr-!Mo steel wi t.h temperature.
86
V~tr:~~·~ :~,bl:n blf yleli.d ~tr;!!!ngt h
steel with temperature.
87
·'t;iii.i!:" liii.·t i ifl!l'li 'o:f tena :ii!! il!itr:-!!!ngt h
steel with temperature.
88
:~~g, 9e. w~il:"litI~;rii ~t il:i:lriiiitiori a.~d r:~diiii::tien ~:f 1u·aa
of 5Cr-!Mo-Si steel with temperature.
89
Yii!i.:dii!i.t ion !1;f ::d'!! ~d ~1':r~!'l".~t'h
steel with temperature,
90
'1!!'!9,:if'i!9.ti~
!!'l!f 'terli!!tl,e :!liti!'"•li!il"l~t~
steel with temperature.
91
92
'!j!'~~:..,!lt.:.0,•i:}fl ,\'.l'f y:~~l'd: i!.lt~!!!i:rii,gi.;h
steel with temperature.
93
!Ui:n .of t"1ir,!f:f.il"1! :!.iit:!"',~r.gt:h
steel with temperature.
94
; .::::ttl ';...+~
+t .~ Stlta~ ~ ~ _. .
. - -ct-:1-if =+£ . Er r~t :3 -e ~~ +S: x ·
~ 'rl•I•· ~ii=;.+Y'.tclift>!l:Ci:i;: '~::": Xt,
• - ~. ~-+ti::; h . . .,~t::r'-: .. 1: L. 1: ,.
t-+- •
•+
·-T--+tt
q:i !,
u..... r+= ..
.il •. ;:µJf'µ_41'!1:~j' ..
,.r.. :
t-·i~-~~--.~~; ~L~P~.~i·
. ~;~ft if, :'3 :mf:-:t:-t"'': ,;!: tti·:
.- '~ .. ~ +l+ ~~ ~ ~i~~ R~-f: ~ ~1¥t-tf.-t ~: :~ H~' if~ ~~:-
:-" n ,, . ifd7 ili: ~~ ! ~3: $ ::,.,.; 11 01 13:'
t~i1 E:f. +1 :r.'' I
-tr ' I.~~;; t~~ ; ~ '. ~ ~~ T.f: :r: I;: q~: rffi fJf ~; ~+ t
.:tl:l: c;.1; ;:J:C)j''" ' ' ' fc:,.; "" ;j ·1· » ..
. 1~E
"
:r£F(: !1'1
H
•.!+L[ :;:: ~t·.1i: j:t: :·1: ;:;: tt'i ;,"f'J'.: -
, ;d J:.=rc;: !:~ ;:i: i ii~:: ft§ E1 l:i.; F' 8i; iit , 1 ''
· t , '+\ :;; t}l r:'.T !'if:r•:s: i''~ l!~L'P f:LiH ' :'fI hr, :r;:1rr·'
1
rn
:t ti fffi 1 ,,, lt :·;! 1h1 : J 1
lL. .u: ,
1
• ·ii · ::.+1 ·: • ' 1 ~n·. iW :;: .:.1 : ' '
",m 1IH ir~un t:.rn:• i~ '', , 'i' .:-q., : , 1
:fffi it Ll'i'' im t " mi ..
:1 +Ji" .ip1r. · i# 7 rn~1ti ~tt t ,..
Fig, llc, Variation of elongation and reduction of area of
?Cr-!Mo steel with temperature,
95
Fig. 12a. Variation of yield strength of 9Cr-1Mo steel
with temperature.
96
Fi~. 'Ub., 'i!!1,~g:-:t!ii!.~:~~:!'! ~:f" ·r;:~:!ii~tl~ ~t.r!!!in~t.1i'!i t.'.lf 9C.:t-=lMt.'.l
steel with temperature.
97
\l'i!t,r:..,1€l!.'~i·l'}!!1 ~:f •1.i!l~ng,s_ti'1:!r•
;!il.'Flid r;j!~~~·t.;i'\t:;~,\!'!'ii
of 9Cr-1Mo steel with temperature.
98
3 4 567881 4567891 4 567891 3 4 5 6 7 891 4 567891
100 I
00
.,.oj
ID
JI:
fl]
fl]
co ~
co Ill::
E-<
fl]
····'°
10.
100
rn
.....
8 ..
rn
[i}
rn
10
10~
8
~ 7
m 6
oil:
..... en
g en
~
E-t 20
en
10
109
.
or!
>:
8
7
6
10
1019
8
7
or! 6
Ul
~
-
s en
en
fil
P:::
E-<
en
1
9
8
7
6
10 ~
8
7
"" 6
m
.k:
10
Pig. 15c. Variation of rupture ductility of )Cr-lMo steel with time for rupture.
0
Fig. 15f. Variation of rupture ductility of 3Cr-1Mo steel with time for rupture.
Fig. 15g. Variation of rupture ductility of JCr-lMo steel with time for rupture.
0
9
~~ g !::rn~~ ~~~
-
8
7
~
6
3 --- "
'
'"' I" ~
.
'1
··-··· I"
I"
~
1'
1'
Ir
" ~
'
' "
'
I 1'
.
:=
==
~
- E
~
• I~
1
Fig. 16. Variation of Larson-Miller rupture parameter
with stress for JCr-lMo steel.
112
10
9:
8
I=
7
§
6
!:::
~
~
5
:::
4 ~
"
3
"
,.
I'\
. ' ~
..
I IJ \
,. ' I'\ •' " I~•• ..
,
'
~
6
. ~
~
-~
I
p g . 17a. Variation of rupture strength of JCr-lMo
steel with temperature.
113
-- -1 4- FF
~ ! ~ ~
i::J=-1 ·=
1~:-=
~+-:::
--r----
----
mEEEEEEEffiffmff&EmNlEESWWmESE=EmEEffi~ff
~ =s_-=i-=
H-+-++-+-+--+--+-H-+-+++-+--+-l-IH-t-++++-+-l-IH-t-+-+++-+-+-t-'W--H-~.i--+-+--+--+-H-t-t-+-+-+--+--+-iH-t-++-+-+-+-l-IH-t-i---~
H-+-++-++-++-++-t-+-++-+++++++-t-t--t-t--t-t--t-1--t-t--H--t-t--t-t--t-t--+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t--+--t--+--t--+--t-H-t-+-~~
l-t-t-+-l-Hl-H-H-H-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-t--t-t--t-t-+++-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-1-Hl-H~~-+-+-+-+-+-+-t-+-+-+--+-t--t-t--t-t-+--i-~~-~ -- ·=
1-+-+-+-++-t-t-t-t-t-t-+-+-++-+-t-+-1-Hl-t-t-+--t--+-+-t-t--+-t-+-t-t-t---t-l-IH-t-+-t--+-t--+-t--t-t--t-t-+-t-t-t---t-l-l~t- \$ ~ =~1=1-'t
l--l-l-l-l--+--+-++-+-+-+-l-+--t-++-l-+~f-+-+++-+-l-+-+--+--++-+-+---l-+--+-l-+++--+-+-l--+++-+-+-+-++-+-+-+++-t-1tt= Jj- -:-
....+
1-"I-'-+-'-+"-+ ....-1~-_;-"1-,_+-.,ter+"'=+=""+
....4..-.-+
....+ ....-1-....,-+"'-1.,;-1;--"1-,_+-._+t,+"=+-:::+,..4-:-+:-:1-1~-;-=-=1-'='+-'-+"=+~+,.._+-=4::--1:-:-1:-:1-;-::::1-'='+-'="+.._+-:::+±+-=-+:-:-+c-::.-1,.:--;-;:;1-::-+-~+"=+j;+
....-+-.;-+~-1~-1;-_;-<-;;>::--+-:-+.._+ ....4
....+ ~--+-__.i"""'-,_,_,-
~1g. lro. ,ar1a~1on op rupture strength of JCr-lMo
steel with temperature.
114
: -
7
5
~
~
4
~
3
,,,,
"
~
I'
!'-
.. ~
:::::
~
"
"
I'
"
'
lm
6
.
4
"
3
. ~
I
i·· g. c. 'ar~at on oj rupture streng th of JCr-lMo
steel with temperature.
115
., "
. : :
.. . :.:: :: : ::::1:
:
~t
,I
~
- -1- 1- 1-
. .J~C
t
H
e ·- I ~r
....- lr.t
\
1 e~ d 11 r1
I
/ A \
-~+~-r-~~~·+-+--+--+--+-->-+-+---+-~+--r-~~-r--f-'+-c-t-+-c-t-T--t--t-t--
i j I 20
116
:_t:.
-- . -1
:· ~- ·-!"-
~- :.r--:+:-
.. -+ ;.....__
..__.,__ -~
4 __
1--
r---r--- 1---t--r--r--
3 __ - t- - +-- r-r--
-----
--
- ~-1-
l-l-++-+-1-++-+-1-++-+-1-++--J'li.l-f9f--+-1H1·~~+-IH-t-t-H--t''f-H-t-t-t-+---t-t-t-+--t-t-t-+-t-rt-~-+-+-+-1-+-+- -r-T-T-t-r---t--;-t-t---i--e-
2__. . . ~ --·~
.
-+-t·- t-- =t=
t-
+- - I-
t-- ~
5
•
4.
3_
__-_+-~ t:(~
l-l-l--+-l-1-1-1--+-1-l-l-l--+-1-1-1-1-++-+-+-+++-+-+-++++-+-++++-H-t+--l---t--l-t+-+-t-_H ,_ ~--
I'
l-l-l--l-+-l-++-+-1-++-+-1-++-+-1-++-+-1-++-+-11-+++-f--+++-H+-t-H+t~+-_1~+-_t_,__ __._----1---+--_,'-: :~~ -'-:~1-1- '1-- __ ,_-+---t--+-+-1--t-
2 '
i--L.....L....1- - - - - 1-1--1---J'I\ r--i\ -·t- ---
1
~ +--I- J__
1-+-+-+++-+-++++++-+-++++-+-t-+-+-+-++-+-t-++-++-+-+--t-+-t-t-++-t--t,---t-Ji-
- - -t--+-i-.-+-
~~~. I- -~; _ t- +- - l
L .LJH~+L.i~~-~H~~~~~~+~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~+-L_-H~~l-~l-;-~+-~H:·~-1-~l-1~-l-L---'--'---l...J.._j_J_~··j~+~··'-:'-'-'-'-'--'__._.....~f-~
Pig. 19. Variation of Larson-Miller creep rate
parameter with stress for JCr-lMo steel.
117
-
"" .... ~
J~I LI
.... .... _
I ""
9
..... 6
fll
.!<ls
50
t/)4
I'll
~
et::
~
I'll
20
-t--t-r+-+-t-
t18
:, :::::=r.::::,:;;tt:;:j:?.-r:::-rr:~f'o'fFF'Arit~1:XJG'i:;.::: 1 -·::' .. ::;: :" :f: :: .• ::y:,: :•·, !:[;';:ff:h'~:t!1:rn°T:~
~=-~-~ ~G"~E"§@"T'"""f"='i="-t.~ .1: 0ig' :~fl:.:-::'-, •::: ::: :: ... ·: :..... '61< ::: ::•: ::;: :::~ H;:ff-§fil't::= :;:
:~:-:-:;~; :;-~t: ~; .-::-~;.;~.: ~;;~~;i~~ ~:~ ;;·; ·;~~ ;.;~; ·:::: :::'.-:::: ::: .... ·: ::·: ~~r~:~ t ~;: ;;;~r;+:<;;~~;;-~ r~;:~;;; ;;;;_ ;~;~ :'._:..o
:: :: :1•=•: ~ii''[; t;., li1 ~ti::J+~ ~',;Ji :· ·;, :tfltt b~· 1 t:il ft!H!fr I i•~1:: ::·='. '' :.:~ ...;.; ~,.;,;.;;.;,; :~ ;.,~;;~ •·
1
: :1;;::{'. J.~' 'Li
1
e:+;11m :~;1 ,, ill! r'n J!i rn. <i:: :n= :n ~;;u :r;;l};et;;cih~ & ,,.... ~~ ••·· ···
., .. ::!:: 1:.
.... . .. .'
119
1 4 567891 4567891 4567891 4567891 4567891
100~
e
6
5
00
or!
m
~
-"'
0
tll
en
~
E-<
U)
100 !. 0
10
--
~
w
w
~
~
8
w
0
1'"' 100
~
.....
II)
:!$.
.;!
~ ;iii
·•
:!!
t/l
t/l
~
~
8
ti)
10~;1 ~.o
~
;,
·~
~
,,
... (/)
(/)
r.:I
~ ~
E-<
(/)
'
l
9
8
~
7
m 6
~
-
N
~
w
=
~
~
w
Pig. 24d. Variation of ductility of 5Cr-iMo steel with time for rupture.
Pig. 24e. Variation of ductility of 5Cr-!Mo steel with time for rupture.
--
w
Fig. 2~f. Variation of ductility of 5Cr-tMo steel with time for rupture.
10 __
9 __
s __ r
--
==o
7 ~~ ====
=
6 -
m B I=~~
t=:~
~~
::::= II
5_
- ~-
4 ~~
- ~- i--~
3
·- 1-1-;-
r
"" -- .. '
+ '~Fl=
2
'
,_
• +
, ,_ '-~~ -~
-- -, __
~~--
-
-~ ~ ~~ ~
,,
,
,
= ~'-
....
•
.kl
~
--""' ,_ . ,_ "'" .. ~
,-
1• -
" l'llo ,_
I r"!I ..-: -
-
~~
I II E'~
~
7_
5_
~
-
"
-
-- --
3_
- ,_
--
...
'
....
• "'"
,_
·-~
L
1g. Z! • VarJatJ on of Larson-M ller rupture parameter
with stress for 5Cr-!Mo steel.
132
9
8 § ~ §~
7
-~~ ~l=mi~~~
8
3 - ·-
'" ,,
. ......
' ... . Ill.
-
- '~
~· '"
· -
1
9
·--~
§§
6
m
•
. • r
" '~
" ,_
~~
1
F~ g. 26a. Varjat1on of rupture streni;!:th of .5Cr-~Mo steel
with temperature.
133
0
~.
- ·-·
9
i=i= § 11
~~~
=
7. -
6 -
. -
~
- --·
-
4 ,_
,_
,_
.
- -
...
...
,
,_
~~
'v
,.,,,
- ILU
'--'-- -
~ 1.. 1..
" ,_
,_
,_
"
"
"" -
' I' '
I•~
" .. 'ii'
9
~~ ~
~§
-§
8
§§ I=
7.
8-t::I::
c
•- ~
t:::
~
!::::
4
- ,_
,_
-,
3 ~
"'
"
''
~ 1. .
'"
1-,
'.
~L
134
10 __
-
9
8_
7 --
==
'=
6 __
5_
4 __
....
l__
7- • EE
t=
5-
4-
3-
'' .. ,.
' ' 11
2-
-
. "
-
---
'
"
- "
"
-
Pig. 26c. Variation of rupture strength of 5Cr-iMo
steel with temperature.
135
9
1
2
---,-":l~
-:·--=~=·-t~I r.1 ;'.
-:=--:- . . -fl~_:·I,
n...
+ r fJ ·11·1
-,
ri
·; I:
1·
:1--j I, I
i
I'I j -~.
I' t1 i\r-1-r
i I ; I i ··1 N-
-f:.T=.-·.
., .~1 • 1rr,
rJ-I
n
j
I ' - ' I
! : ; : I ii
'
j
' I . 'I ~ r .._1~
i I •
'1·1·
1-
- - ---- -· t
1--------r-----i-11·• t-rl- 1 •1: :·--1 -i r i---~,
: •
I i . :
· '
' '. 1
1 , i• :' ' I ·
1'
r I : · 1
1 :-
r 1 I
·~
1 ,·
r;
r-!-
=
136
.......
.. .·
.....
4_
2----·
L .................................................~..........~-=--'"................................,._..--;-_..,....._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.__......_._.~~~~~
Pig. 28a. Variation of creep strength of 5Cr- Mo steel
with temperature.
137
10
8
l
5
9
- ~
2 ~
..
......
I
.. '
9
""'
8
l
3·
~
--
..,,.,,. ~·
D.
I
9
8
l
5
-
4
I
Fig. 28b, Variation of creep strength of 5Cr-iMo
steel with temperature.
138
t 4567891
10~
:~
00
_,
m
~
rn
faP:
... E-<
rn
~
;Q
·•.t· 1 100
10
50
10
Fig. JOa. Stress vs secondary creep rate for 5Cr-!Mo Si steel. The super
imposed curves were computed from the master parameter curve, Fig. 32.
100
~
•
~
•
m 10,§
~
~
~
-0
00
00 +.
~
~
~ ]
00
20 ~
10 m ~
~
1
$
•
~
1 ~
;!i
:~
oM t 0
Ill "!!!
.!ii:: ·;;
;~
(/)
.
.... (/)
~
p::
t 8
(/)
:~
Pig. )la. Variation of ductility of 5Cr-!Mo-Si steel with time for rupture.
0
-
7
3 :=
~
. .. ... ....
.
,~
l"o
II..
"
-'
...
" "'
' ... '
1
~-
6 • • I •
•
3
~
....
,, "'
I\,.
. . I\,.
., .
1
Fig. J2. Variation of Larson-Miller rupture parameter
. I
151
10
-
~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~
- ~§
,,
-
,_ -
'' ... tw.11.;11111-
... "'
, I ' "'i... ~' h
9
8
7
4 '~'~
2 "
i...
'
'
I
"
I
, "
' '"
9
8
z
6
4 ~·
~
-~
3
-,
-
;:c - ·.:.::..··-.-
~
'
- ,-1
-- -- - ~~-
--
2
-I - I
,_ ---
Fft::
I
--~ - t
Fig. JJa. Variation of rupture strength of 5Cr- Mo-Si
steel with temperature,
152
.
10
~ -
j:.~ -
··- - --
-·
-· -- -··-
8
l
-+
6 :::r.:... -~~
~
-~
~
5 ~
4 -
t:::
t:::
3 E
~
~
~
,... ,...
2
... ,...
I"
r...
I !'I
9 ~
8 to
t:::
l ~
6
~
5
~
~
4
~
3
§
t::
~
2 ~
,...
I " I' f'
t::
9
8
j:::;
l
~
. -
~
~·
I
Fig. JJb. Variation of rupture strength of 5Cr-~Mo-Si
steel with temperature.
153
10
-
-
,_
,_
- -
-¥-- ---
.... -~
'
--- -
, ,. "r....
:=E
7
~~
;;;;;;
:::::: ~
6
•
- ,_
" ,_ ...
... ...
" ,..,
~·
.I
... L ~
I'
''
I ' ·-
!'..
·-
9
~
8 -·- ·-
l
5
"
4
~
,
-
3
. r-
I
11.·u ~.
_J
-
~ ~
I
_,_ -+-
i 1+ - - -~ -·
-
154
"
.....
~5
I 4
'"'
I' ' I\.
I\
I' "I\.
'
~--
-j
- ,-- -~ --LJ--l--l-l-+-1--+-f-+-+-l--+--H-+-t-+--H-
1-1-1-1-
l-f--l--l-l--1--1--l--lf-+-+-+-+--f-+--l--'-+-H--t-+-+-+-'L
_JI p I' ~ II B
"'" I,~ 1. 'I
,__ -K-
~. l---1--1-1-+-l-1
155
10 _
9_
''
s __
7_
6-
5_
4 __
3_ -
"'EE
t=t=
•
........ +=r:
B ~g:: ~~ ~~ ~ ~~
"'
- !'~ §~ Ill ~
to
t::
.~
--
............... tit' .
I
"
I" I' "~
l'I
l'I
" l"I !'- "
l_ ~
- ...... ..... • " ... 10
9_
B
7
6_
5 5
4
-
~
11.:1111 IL ll ~ 6
,,
L_ , =e PI:
n
I'\
'' ~ . l'
'" 1
9
B
]_
~-~
6
5
.5
4
~~
3_
.2
'"
''
"
I ,I,
156
J '517111 •517111 ' 5 6 7 111
lD'f 1
•
7
6
5
4
lCf
8
lOO
7
ori 6
m
~
-"
en (/)
(/)
'
~
E-<
(/)
'
I
:10
8
7
6
5
'
J
1019
8
-4
!I)
,k:
.....
~ {/)
{/)
r:<1
p::
8
{/)
10
7
6
10
io:i 100
8
-t
II)
~
...
a> (/)
0 (/)
M
er:
E-<
(/)
100~ 10
8
.....
CD
.....
1.0 10
CREEP RA'l'E per cent per 1000 hours
Fig. J7b. Stress vs secondary creep rate for 5Cr-iMo-Ti steel. The super-
imposed curves were computed from the master parameter curve, Fig. 41.
,. c.n en ....,oac.o-
" -
II' J
l'I
2 _ _.
1 . 1'
. ._ _
i l::t:t::t:~:::t+::tt+t:j::::j:::t:::J=~:::f=l:=t+++:::J::+:++H=~_=++=+++-~
"
l-1---++--l--+---l-l-+-l-1---+-++++++--+-+--1-++++++-t-+--1-+-H-f-++f~•t ~ \
-A.l-'--+-+-+-+--1-~-t--1---1--1--+-+-+-+-+-+--+--+-+-
6_
5_
'-'-'
4
p --
,, l'l
H-+-+-+-++-++--H-+--t-+-f--1--H-+-t--J-+-+-t-+ +-l--t--+--l--1H-
-----~
---c-- ,_,-r:\- ,.----- _ ,_ --•-- -
- _,___ ~
-- -
f\1111.
-- -1-- ~,~-- -
'I\
_,__
2_ _- ,_ ----
~-_t:. __ i} i=: ·- - __ ,_, _c::c::_ "' - -
_ _
' . 1--It-
_
~~-- ----~·· ~-
,_,_ _j__j___j_j__j__.)_"'l
_
t:t::t-
+-+-+-f--+-+'---+-+-+-+-+ +-1--l--+-+-H-+-+-+ i-1..-1---1..- _ .__
+-+--+--+-+-!- - · - - H- - , _ -- ~
-~--- -1--1--1--1---
- ----
t--!-- t--t-- t--
-~-+-+--~+-!--+
j__
J.__ -
-·- -
- ·--
'1-
j f:
. .
Fig. 39. Variation of Larson-Miller rupture parameter
with stress for 5Cr-iMo-Ti steel.
164
8
Fl'i= t::
= '1-
·· r - i - 1 . I'\.:·
I •
-~
3
i--+-·'~
l--+---t--t-+-;--r-1--- "
rl--l--++++--H-l--H--+++++-t--t-1r-+t++t-tt--H--t-t-H
.
" ''
.
4
165
1~8~_-_ '":" ___: '~~---=~ -'=~(-~_:! .i _;_~, .--~ _: __ "'j· -_r--.:
·-r: ·.i--
.-t' :•:~-~":
:i.::·.
_,.
.. :. "'
=
••
. c= · · :-,ci-l'C' · -'fcf-1.-1 Ll .C:C -r-"' c/;·· ·.or- :-:i - ::-:C::.:_-:__
··"'Cec "'i:CL; f i [-_t '-- l.::to· '- . ·-,~~ -· -_-c;,_ -F-
7 d._::cfJ-··· ·-i-~- I- 1-r- - ·- . .:_.::....::..:i---~
_;;_
~~-- ;
~- ~~E:-·~ r~~~·;_: -
4
- i-i-EE£ •. =:= 1-=:~~;::·~ ~::r~-T: --~==:_:
1-t
::t-. :r:
- i-i-i-i-
- t-t·r- -1 +- i-· - .
:=: ~:. -
-r-rt-
~ lit-=~li:t-: t:(: :!: t:J:=[: :t: t:(: :!~'"';:J, [: :t: j: :N~:1=1;: :t: j: :): :j:=l=i=1+ =t=J:+:J:=1=-t"_1,_=__:~~:):=::tJt t-·-tr- ~1"-t-·>·_,~c-~- 1-~-~ ~ ~~: i-+-~t-t- +~-t:~_,-=_~-;~-=
t--+-t-t-t-t-t-t-r-+-+-t-+ -· i-t--j- ___ ,_,_,_,_ -· r- - -- - r -
···r-- :~- -
t::::.-:"1·-:-1-f= - i::.-i::-..:t:- -:.+- =-.
6
3
-~- .. !-
I !J :
t-1+-t-+-+-t-++-+-t--+-t-+-+-t-T-+-+-+-+-- - - - - - '
-- - .
-- - - t-
::f' - ---~-
i- .=t- -11\ - - - t-- ..... t I
11[ .
T r
!I
I: r 1
Ii:
I,
I,
h> ,_ --+-t-+-++-+-t-++-;t-t-+-t -- - - - - - - ,_ - -11- " - - f- · · \ -I , . I
I
I I I I i I I
2
!1':1-~~!
1
:
_ l-1 ! I
1 1
1:
i :j I
1 I I I
11: : i 'i
I
I
l I
I
166
--·
5
:- -_
-.. ~=-
- f--1- ·-
~. + -·-
4
-
r-r·r·•-
3_ J'111111111111111111-~1>-~m+fil--~-
f:----+.:-
l-+-1--H-+--t-+-+-++-+-++-+-++++++-+-+-+-+-t-+-t-+-1--H~'~-----1
-----1~-+-+-~-++-"=+~++-++++-+++~.:::-.:::-.:::-t='t='i=::'i=::'r~H'r-i-~"-+--+•-+~--t=:+-+~-
l-+-1--H-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-++++++-+-+ +--+--+--~-+-,-+---+-+~-+-+-+-+-+-· 1-·l--Hl-H-+--t-+--+-+-+-++-+-++-+-+-+-+++++-+·j-+~-
··-
l"I
1--H-+--t-+-t-t-+--+--ll,,<+---+-++.ut-++-+-++-+-t-+-1-+-1---H~rl-++-+-++-+-+-i,~-I-++
1--H-+--+-+-+-++-++--+V-+++-Nll-+-+-+-+-+-t-+-1-t--H-,1--H-+--+-+-+-t--t-.i F~ ·
t--t-t--t--t-+--t--t- ·-~--+-+-+--+- •-+--t-t--+-+--t--+-i--+-+-+--t--t
~ ~-~r-•- •-~·--·-
--=_;·:;-;,~z~~~--
. .:-:-_;
. -- -=--
~ -_ ·.=::.-: -
-~-~
-
.
: ~·.:. -::~-:..:: - --
7
6_ - -r= ~~ =:-==
- -
-~-.
----~ . .:-.
- -_:" f--- ~
t- -
5_
-J :I - -
· - ·- -·>---
---e-·----
-·-
4 -f--1--1--1-- -
II I' I ~ _I1.~,
l 1 I 1.:-i-_
-+-++-l--t---1-1-- --·- -
l-t--!-t-+-+-1-+-+-H-I·-++-+-+-++-+ ~' I
r-.:J+:11·- -1t- l 1 I 1·:-ft
'
1J
:
1: '
I r I
I:
I
1' :
ii I
I
I I 11
t:. I
1' t1
~--, ~HJ q ; ; j jljl 9q ! I i :12 QQ ! \J. ! i ' J-L!~ 0. cq
e-
!
J_
:-:::;:_-:_;:,-+:::;_.-;_f
+--+--+-~-+-
__
--t-lr"'ll.,.,rt--t-
r I
Fig. 40c. Variation of rupture strength \ of 5Cr-tMo-Ti
steel with temperature.
167
10
t : - ! f j, [,-1 ~ ! : L I i ' I I ; ; ! I j ! j I J ~ j : I I l
9 T It ; ! 1- I ! ! I I I·-; I l : i-1 I i:
i i I ' 1 .L I !. l ! 1
1
8
r I r ...L - 'I~ ~- .! ;_ TL 1 : - L i' "_/ , ~. ! J-i l 1- :t ! - - . J:. ,- i I i j L-
7 ..
[/)
[/) l
~1 ~~'r" ~: !-t-,( :X- :""!" ii --1-'·- I.+ ·.·r_ It'-
t!8
1 -· 1
1i 1 I i I
.1
1
;
i ! :--t L t! ! -J __-, J_ --~J T:J -
•••T
i -i.-:- tj
I
:
6 i i ;
1 -·
I\.! 'f H1
5 t ~ :,_ !
1 1; f ! '1 ! j::'_
j :.it
;.1- ·- i -· ii ~- f\_ .,. :\ .
: +
I' \' : . j
1. ;-1 I
I!
4 I' I
'1-:
'- ' i I\: I .
h-+ i :_ ~+ ! :\ f", Ii .I : i'
! \:.
1
, : I: -: ' I '
3
\.: '\-'
'' ''
•
~
;
-t
r
-:
'. 11;
' -: .
-;.-
i
I I
1-t-
I,
I ..
~- i 1 ~
'~-i!·
'
I
Ii:.
I:
1
I
I!!
!_,
: .
\.!.. \ . ' I i
' : I'
1
1
1
"
:
I
~
I
i
I
I
+; j I \ : ,! ;\i I i1 I ti :-1-
I' I: : ;\: 1:;\
2 ! I·.- I
,_
l
'
·\ '\ '
T(l 0
)11-
og r
)~
x l<""),
Ja
,
!
I'
' I\:.: '
'
i :! ;~_~
I\·
' I i '
Fig. 41. Variation of Larson-Miller creep rate parameter
with stress for 5Cr-iMo-Ti steel.
168
• •
!O __ _
9 __ _
9 __ _
7 __ _
n 1111 i
6 __ _
5 __ _
4 __ _
3_ __
2_ __
,
'~
'~
'~
..,
. -
... ... ...
1~
r~IE 1 '~
. r-..
II"
' I"
--
,_ '~
'~
,.
,,
1r
.
,
....
I"
~
I"
r-~
... I'
I
5_
4_
3_
-- "
,., ,.,,.,
... '"''"'- ..- '" IL IL
" ~.~ " ....
....
L
"M"
"' ...
Pig. ~2. Variation of creep strength of 5Cr- ~Mo-Ti steel
with temperature.
169
1 4 567891 4567891 4 567891 4567891 4567891
1oq
8
7
6
1q 00
8
or! 7
Ill 6
.!ii:
........ I
ti)
0
Ul
~
er:
E-4
ti)
1009 .0
8
-.-....
10
RUPTURE - hours
Pig. 4Jb. Stress vs time for rupture for ?Cr-!Mo steel. The superimposed
curves were computed from the master parameter curve, Pig. 46.
•
-
.....
N
RUPTURE - hours
Fig. 4Jc. Stress vs time-for-rupture for ?Cr-!Mo steel. The super-
imposed curves were computed from the master parameter curve, Fig. 46.
I 2 3. 567191 2 2 • 567891 •567891 2 • 5 6 7I9I
10~ 100
~'
·~.
:~
10,~ 10
or! ii
m 'I
~ ~
15.
~
(/J
(/J
~
E-<
(/J 1¥
10 iii·; 1
~
'i!
!I;
,;
;i!
L1
0.01 O.l l.O 10
CREEP RATE - per cent per 1000 hourp
Fig, 44a, Stress vs secondary creep rate of 7Cr-tMo steel, The super-
imposed curves were computed from the master parameter curve, Fig, 48,
1 4 5 6 7 8 9J 4567891 4567891
10 ~
Fig. 45a. Variation of ductility of ?Cr-iMo steel with time for rupture.
"'
.......,....,
0
... ..
~ f-+t-H+H+itffffl'lfflliii
~ H-tti+Hft+lttttttttlttt
.........
P:: H-lf-tttth!tthHttftttttt
co if H-+++tt+fttttrltttttttt
00
10
ti] 8_ "- -- . - c['' - - - __r r: ' c:t:r' -:J:[. -"'' tcJ_HC'-1 11\ I : -X"'1 _,j -! _ l ! II r l -J- -
<-c<-:,o_- ,- -,,,_;__: W- - ___ J,_~ - ~- _:E -, -._-:fc ,-L 'o:-C[_-j_C:j:, _-f''tc~~l N i _, i _,- -~I _1 I!i ' -. -!- 1--: >=
1- I ; -1
:1
I: ! I I
I
Fig. 46. Variation of Larson-Miller rupture parameter
with stress for 7Cr-tMo steel.
180
.. 1- t,1--
-:L -·:r-_ -r
---.:.!-~.
= -~-i :::r;_:1_.:_:1--_ ~-
__ ---.:::-=i=-- ~=
t~ 1-..: -:·: _· __(""
7 ~c. - .J:;'
__ L..::_L- .•
6
- +-
5_
--i----l-'--'-- -
_ _:_- t-t-1-I--
f-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+--+--+-+-+--+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+--!-+-+--t-->--l--l-+-J--l--'--J-!-+-l'-1--+-lf-+-!-L--l--L~L _ - ~
-l--
181
10 __ _
9 ---
..- " - . ·-- .- - -- -·
8 - ---
. ~· -=---+ - ==t:. - r- .:. . - - - - -_. . . .. .. - ~-=
4
+ t-~-- -
-f--
··- -
t--f--t--
3
,..,...
1-+--+--+-•~~---+..i>-+-+--+--+-+--+-+--+--+-+-+-+--+-+-+--+-+--+-+-+-+-+--+-+--t-+--t-+--f--t-l---tr-~·--t-t-+-+-i--+-t-t---rt-+-+-+--+--+--+--+-+--+-+--+-+-+-+--i
t---t---f-+-t-t--1rll'l.._,,."-,-+-;--+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+--+--+--+--+-+--+-+-+-+-+-t---t-r-+-t-+--r--r-11-;- ,-,-t-- -.-_,_--r-_-r--r-;--i---r+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+-<-+-+-+--+-+-+-t-t---t-1
--r~~·-~~~{'l~'H"~lllll1lllll1Tu~~f--·~f--·~·~
~
.t- ~-+·~m~[l~i~~~lill' r- 1-- •-t--t----t-rH
7-
5_
3_
2-
i--+-t-++-t--+-t-+-+-+--1--+-+-+--t--+-+++++-+·++-+-1--+++-+++++++-+--+-+-'-
-- - -: . -
-r-~~\"
- -- '
-l ~t -= ~ ~ ~:r-1·
-1
- I
--+ :_ · ~ 1 I:
' - I ,- I t-
f--- t--t-- - -___:<:: --_1 ~,-_":-'\-~I!-' --~--:1-·11- -If f::11--l1f
- -f-- - "
-:_r- ~~
~- - ;
f
- ~
I
I
'
..
.
1-..- -~ I · I·' 1
- - - L ~ Pl>I j-- - - L iJ iJ • -- t<~ J~ 1-
:::_:_:---=--1-t-- t-+--H--_:-+. : r1! ~ ~ ~1I
...•--++-·+_+-+_f---+-,_+f---:+--+:-1-t--+-t----t-r+ rultl l'!_-: l:, I~ -r~ .. / !
--- ---- -t--, f--f--t-=·=--~--tr.. rT++rii ~11f 1 1
Ir-I
--.-f-f---f--f--1Tr----
1
. 1
t---t---t--+-+-+-+-- - - _, -- I- - 1--t· •· - -- - . ' . I \ I tI i I I I l
-f i1:--1iit :i 1 I 1 11 I !
F g. ~7b. Var ation of rupture stren~h of 7Cr-tMo
steel with temperature,
182
10 --
-~>cl·!lil~-~1~=-~~~~~~.~~-~--~~~·~¥--R--~+-rg·~+:,Pl+:q.+:p:'+_'_ P+~G,c~.~W~~~-~-~~4±~~ 1~
- ---~~ :::~~~~==--
_
~ -~.f.t.. --~:;-~- --: ~·: - :_:;: :- .. '.:.:- ·-· t- - . --_- _ _ _ -_,:_r-· -_ ~
- ..=..:---_ 1-=---- re_- - -~:- ,=r--- e.:1C- - .•. 'l~: :: t=
7_ - =- >-:: __ •-::_-.C:.:c=_::c:l=l-~:r---
-- =t-=3=· --- ~ :~
_ _::. __ -- -+\- __...;..:1.·
6 =
5 -- -+-
-= -_.:===~- ~f-
H-
=_:_1= ---r:-+-- I- --~-l--t--1--
-----
1-f---f---
-, t-
3
>---+--+-+-+--+-+-+--+-+--+--+--+-+---+--+-+---+--+--+---+--+--+---+--+--+----t--+-+----++--~ 1
-~=+ - ,
--tl-0°.l~jL~i:l~----i-t---+--f-t-+--+-+-+--+-+-+--+--+---+--+--+--+~-lr---f-
-f_[t_i- -7--H--f----i--+--1 +-e- - --'-r--t---t---+--+--+----t-+--+-+-+--+----+-+-•-+-+-+---+-+--+--
i.--+-+--+--+-+--+--+-+--+--++--+-+--+--+--+-'-+--+--+--+-+---+-+-+---+-+-+----+-+-t-t--t---r- --rl-t-; --;-J-r+ - +
--r---f--- -t-+----r--+--t->--+-+-+--t--<---+---+--+--+--+---+--i
. J.
7 -- t~c=-Cf::!=..C == -- =:c;-::,--= ~ - :'A l 'S-~ 1 .fr' t:'l'='f= .:£f.i~k =FkF" i-t~:± L 1--l 1J.-' - - IL I i --t-- - --- •=
i=: -- : 3 \ f".& :n £c=g ~T'-1~::-Eili•-'__ :1f'!=T :p=f-:t---=-- -:__ ;~ 1 -l= -
6 =:~H=?.::'-':---_: --1" =i'---"='~·ii"fT;+N'~·'~iFL-i~:l' i!~·T rn---t -Lc~.C:f:•ci-_ ',--
- ·~ _,_ ------ t -- NT~- ':N\.C: ! ~:f:_If-' i +:::x :+'!- :t---nE f - i :-:r: :! j
5 __ :i::i::c5--:E=E-litr.--fJUf 'T~ j~ -~~:-;---_ ·;-j·~ -z :t·+~~-j-• t -r--- r--
- I
t .,
ti.ion:
~ ' ~ \
1200 1400'
I
: '
TEMPERATURE F i I
;:
Fig. 4?c. Variation of rupture strength of ?Cr-!Mo
steel with temperature. -
183
10 __
9
7 __
6 __
5 __
4 __
5_
4_
184
.--.
10 __ _
g __ _
8---
7 __ _
6 __ _
I
-
5 __ _
"---
3 __ _
2---
..
... ""
'I
.....
I~
!'-
l'I.. l'I.. ' l'I
l'I..
l __ _
9 __
8 __ ·1j II
7__
6 __
5 __
"--:
"
""' I" I" ,...
}__
"' 10
~
\
9-
8-
7 -
6 -
5-
3
-
-
-· - - • ~- ~
-
2
--- 2
,.
!\ II
,_
II• llll "' "' 1 I(
185
100
10 00
•.-I
w
.It!
Ul
_. Ul
co
C>
1%l
0:
E-+
Ul
100 0
10
1019
8
7
..... 6
a> 5
~
...~ 3
ti)
faex: 2
E-t
ti)
.10
11
o.-4
Ill
~
en
f3Ck:
-i E-<
rn
109 00
•ri 8
Ill
~
..... en
en
~ rq
11::
8
en
~
1 10
m
~
ro
~
ro
~ ~
8
ro
·1
9
1
8
4 __
3__
l~~~~~~~~~~~,~~,,~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l
2
"
,.....
-;:
-- c
1-. -
- ' ' ~~
1- -1-r-1--
0 "'
0 ...
0
""'
fl)
11--
E-4 9 _
EE - -
8_ - : .. - i---:-t-:: - r=
7_ _
6_ ~~
5_
4_
3_
2·---·f----•-.::::l··-f--
~::t+::ttt:!=:t=t=J::t:H=J=t+tl+:j::#:j:::j::t:H-'=f=H'+H=T---l=t-'=°;::;::+_
l-l---1-lH--l-+--l-lH-+--+---i-,H-+--1---+-'H-+-+-+-H- · - - - ·- ·- --
,·~,:_· ··
lf-- R
f---
I- -
-'-
- - - -·-·-~ -
+ff--- -. -
l-l-+--1---1--l-+-+4--+--1-- -l-+--l-lH--1-+-HH-+-+--l-lH-++ >--- l- - - 1--1--1-- i-- - -
LLL...LL...LL...Ll.,..LI-LL...LLLLLLL.LL.Ll.,..L.J...LJ.....J....J....L..JU...JLLJ....J.....L..l.....W..--'-.l.-l....l...J....L--'-'----'-J--'-L.-J....J_-'-'--'---'---'--'--'-'-..J....L-'--'-'--"--'-'
-t --+
Fig, 53, Variation of Larson-Miller rupture parameter
with stress for 9Cr-1Mo steel.
196
E-t 9 _
fl)
8_
I ~ -
E
7
6_
5_
4_
t:
-1- 1111;;:1-·t--
3_
l-l--l-l-l-1-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l--1-l-l-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-~~+-+-+-+-++++++~-~-+-r-r-t--t-'~-~-t-t-r-t·~~- r;-r-~rr~
l-l--l-l-l-1-l--1-l-l-+-+-l-l-l-I-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-~-~~~ 1---~ ~ _,
197
9-·
10
7
~
~~
~~ ~E ~~ ~111
~!;;;
"'
~
6
~
5 ~
:::
f-
"" ,,
,- •
I\.
2_ I• '
-f-
"''" -\.
I\. !\.
"'
, ....
1-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-~~i-+--+-+-+-+.~~~+"~~_,...,_-+--l-~-+--+--l--+--l--+--l--+--l-~~4 +-+--+--+--l-++-~-+--l--+--l-~~-+--l--+--l--+--l--+--l--+--l-~-kJ
1--+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-•-'+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-~"+-+-+'lol-'~11,.++-++++-++-++-++-++4-
I\.
~8
7
-+--.
..,__•-
6
5 . =:t= - -
- '-
-~
f-
t- -_
' - r ! _I i' '
f-
-l=T 1 I .,
,_,_ --r--i- -
t=-H~+=t=I-
r::;:l
_f:-+-i ,_:
-~->- ~
I
; i.
I
I
,::: :: .
• ' '
I
·I
'
'
'
'
. . ;
• •-t-·•
'
•
-1-n-·-
: I
i-
~{
I e-L }-t~ II. J.
I ; -
1 1-r-- i i' I
I
-I
-Li='=.L
t-
1
-
~ -i- '-
--
.±±±±±±::f=l
1
·t---1~-+-+->-'-J
~~H+ :=~
t
'.-t
,_ -1-+-
:+ :
• '.
~
-;--,
'; ~
1 -
l I·~ -f - I . ,_:::=:::=r--
--- '[i-t ; r .1 i
I 1 ' ; .. : i
f-1-~H ~if re 00:; : '1~< o~ :_~ . /Pijlq~ Ft-1 ~::1~ ~( -r-1~ I~
1 n_ f tti ; :i: 1 . . . --j ln11:1• 1 ......: :. .
,·i;.q~ PE~·J vru:i ri : ,
1 • , ,
Ii
'
,
i
:
'
•
. 1· l-1
1 .. 1 1
1
n
= - l '
.
,
,
1
'
, 1
Oji<,
-
t _.-_~tif
1
1 l
l-'-i ,_,_
f-
J-Ll_-'-L.J._J
:::~1,--1,.:11~1~-t!_· :11~•:
l I;, ; ,
:·:1 ::1: !
1::1-11·1:: :1 :;::
~ ~ i i-J - !
1 ; 1 ~ r ! : . • 1 ; f 1 1
i
!
ii 1-~11 ·.=,__:·_
, -
Fig. 54b. Variation of rupture strength of 9Cr-1Mo steel
with temperature.
198
7
--- - . :-::-:==~ ,_t--
'
7_
6_
5_
--->--
3_ 1--+-+--+-l-+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-l-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-+-+--+-ti--t-+----+-<>--e-r-+-+-+-
+-+-t--t---r--t-1--+-t--Hr-t--+ t--t-t-t--+-t
-f-4--+--+-+--+-+--+-+--r-+-+- ----~f--
1--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-t-+--+-+-t-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-I~
'-+-+-r- ' - - 1-- - · r-- r- -r-+-+--+-+-+-r-t--+--r--r--t-t-t
1-+-+--+-l-+-+--+-1-+-+--+-1--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-1-+-+--+-1-+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-l--+-+-+--+'11...,_+-f- - , ____ - - --r--i--r- - 1-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-+-+--+-+--+-1
2
-nm·lllElEmmR'
===
RHWMISE
-
-- -\ --
__ . ---
+-'--+-+--+--+--+-+-+-+--+- l[--r
''~'"''
+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-+-+--+-+--+-t-t-+--+-+--+-r-+-+--+--+-+-1\"
- j--
_
___ -
~---1~
-
r-·-f·-
1--
i-- r--1-1-
1-i= ;:::
-· t - r - r - -
-- - -
-·
..
-- -
-----
---f-1-
,__,__
- -:__:: .---+- ~
___ ;_~~-
L mm::++mmm::++H+m~~mm1~ .
.. - f- c r-
199
10 __ _
7--~-
6 __
5 __
4 __
3__
..
''
I"
..
''
l_ _ _
9_
8 = I= ===
7_
200
0
9
8
7
6
5
-
4
2
~ r'I
,..,.. ....
' I' ,"... I' ,... 0<1u
-
~
"'"'I"'~-
~ l'lal l'I~~
'' ,,
"
,... "'
I'
I'
,... '
,...
-
1'
L
9 -E " l'I
10
8 - I=
7
6-
5-
5
4
-
c
2- " "
2
"
'
'
I "
I ~-
,_ -·'-·-· "
. 56.
,~
201
Fig. 57. Comparison of yield strength ratios.
202
'h · ·c- +IT 1 ·f+ t oCF~ :.[+ W rr:ti1 m:lf~ t' 1
~ - •1 • I .....-r: •
.---. ~. 71 ~ .t ~-'.:: t-;- •. : H-; -:- ' : • . -
. ~'"J IH'r t;: :;i:i;: !~/!i! ': +; ·-
• ~t-
i;:~ .r ::i
+ ~it~<
:JJ. hi: t·
w :J if ~t;
'+ +1
,,
.....;. t+
"'
'!ft t;;.
tj t fl
I
t
•• +
: : . J • 1:11
'711 ~,,,.
11: 1::1
T
ffLl I' Ii'
. . t
:r:: if.':~.
ll'·I:1·111· . ·1
I . 1 :1 " ;:_!: ::: :: :;: :t ,..
Utt y: ,:;1 ,,,. :: .1: j. "tt''1 :: . :·
:::': :: ...
H : • • · , : ' • · • t:i ,'Ii II • +: I!tj I; " I;;;. · · : ! '. ; : : : IH \i c:I; l · ::;; ~ t l t •• ·.: •: · • • •
Ult +n 1 it; :d i·i 1: :r . 1:1: 11:11 :,· : !t::: 1:: 1:1: 'i 1:::,,::1 :ftt :11 :'I! "' 1 :1:\1•:: ;, 11t'.' ::
.,.. 't :ti• lf!J
+ ,, !:[ ffl :~. "' i[j li_l:
• • •• ' t I i r I Ui ,, I:' 1,: iJ:t....
•• • • 'i' :rJ% H1i
!<j . '!Ii: :!.. !i':H ::;
. ....
1ff t n !'ff tfrl 1H u\YT iT 'H!1tt1 ! :1r '!lit!: i ! \ji ;11! jj! ;IH :1t11:11 i !I :1' 1 ;:i ::;: ::
Fig. 58. Comparison of tensile strength ratios.
203
10 __
-
9
8 __
7 --
6 __
5 __
4 __
3_
_,___ '
f--
2_
"J'
"' ' I\.
'~
"
'" "'
" "'
> '' I\.
l__
I
I > " "' '
9_
8_
7_•
6_
5_
4_
3_
\ I
'
2_ I
-
~-
;--
,_
r-fi
,,t-I ' :
L 1 -i- -- _:~,'l u
+
,_\1 i f-i
i-r ++
'
- · 'l J l ll ll
204
I~
5_
4_
'
1-+-+-+-++++++-+-+-+--+-+-1--+4-+--H-+-+-+-+-++++++++-+--+-+-1--+4--t-1-+-+-+-+++-+'IHl-~-l--+-+-l--+4-+--1-+-H-+-+-+-+-~~
~tttttttt+++~~~~~~=~~~tttttttt++++~~~~~~~~~ttttttt~~"~~~~~~~~~=~~~tttttt++~.~
,, " If 11 " " .. n1
205
ASTM-ASME specifications for grades of steel included in this evaluation (1974)
207
Specified minim\DD strength
208
Chemical Requirements - percent
c Mn p s Si Cr Mo
.IS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .SO max 2.6S-3.3S .80-1.06
. IS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .so max 2.6S-3.3S . 80-1. 06
.IS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .so max 2.6S-3.3S . 80-1. 06
.IS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .SO max 2.6S-3.3S .80-1.06
. IS max ( 3 ) .30-.60 .03S max .03S max .SO max 2.7S-3.2S .90-1.10
. IS max ( 3 ) .30-.60 .03S max .03S max .SO max 2.7S-3.2S .90-1.10
.ls max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .SO max 2.6S-3.2S .90-1.10
.IS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .SO max 2.6S-3.2S .90-1.10
.ls max .30-.60 .04 max .04 max .so max 2.6S-3.3S .80-1.06
.ls max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .so max 4.00-6.00 .4S-.6S
.ls max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .so max 4.00-6.00 .4S-.6S
.ls max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .SO max 4.00-6.00 .4S-.6S
.ls max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .SO max 4.00-6.00 .4S-.6S
.ls max .30-.60 .04 max .03 max .so max 4.00-6.00 .4S-.6S
.ls max .30-.60 .04 max .03 max .so max 4.00-6.00 .4S-.6S
.ls max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .so max 4.00-6.00 .4S-.6S
.2S max .60 max .04 max .03 max .so max 4.00-6.00 .4S-.6S
.ls max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .so max 4.00-6.00 .44-.6S
.2S max .60 max .04 max .03 max .so max 4.00-6.00 .44-.6S
.10 min 1.00 max .04 max .03 max 1.00 max 4.00-6.00 .40-.6S
.20 max .40-.70 .04 max .04S max .7S max 4.00-6.BO .4S-.6S
209
Specified minimum strength
210
Chemical Requirements - percent
c Mn p s Si Cr Mb
.lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max 1.00-2.00 4.00- 6.00 .4S-.6S
.lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max 1.00-2.00 4.00- 6.00 .4S-.6S
.12 max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .SO max 4.00- 6.00 .4S-.6S
.12 max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .SO max 4.00- 6.00 .4S-.6S
.lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .S0-1.00 6.00- 8.00 .4S-.6S
.lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .S0-1.00 6.00- 8.00 .4S-.6S
.lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .S0-1.00 6.00- 8.00 .44-.6S
. lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max . S0-1.00 6.00- 8.00 .44-.6S
. lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max . S0-1.00 6.00- 8.00 .44-.6S
.lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max .2S-l.OO 8.00-10.00 . 90-1.10
.lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max . 2S-1. 00 8.00-10.00 .90-1.10
.lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max • 2S-l. 00 8.00-10.00 .90-1.10
.lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max • S0-1. 00 8.00-10.00 .90-1.10
.lS max .30-.60 .03 max .03 max . S0-1.00 8.00-10.00 .90-1.10
.20 max .3S-.6S .04 max .04S max 1 ..00 max 8.00""10.00 .90-1.20
211