Proceedings of the Twenty-first (2011) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference

Maui, Hawaii, USA, June 19-24, 2011

Copyright © 2011 by the International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers (ISOPE)
ISBN 978-1-880653-96-8 (Set); ISSN 1098-6189 (Set); www.isope.org

Forgings for Low Temperature Applications – Influences of the Alloying Concept

and Advanced Forging Procedures on Impact Strength and Fracture Toughness
M. T. Welsch 1; D. Bruch 1; E. Østby 2
1
Bruck Forgings, Saarbruecken, Germany
2
SINTEF Materials and Chemistry, Trondheim, Norway

ABSTRACT
Forgings are widely used in offshore applications such as piping
components (e. g. flanges or T-pieces) or structural parts in oil and gas
exploration. With the expansion of the oil and gas recovering area in
the arctic region, resistance to brittle fracture at low temperatures is of
great importance for all components, regardless of their manufacturing
process. Since forgings generally have larger wall thicknesses than e.g.
tubes, it is more difficult to realize the required properties over the
entire cross-section.
In this article, the investigation of two fine-grained structural steels of
different grades (ASTM A694 F65 and F70) in the form of two
different forging geometries is presented. The work has been carried
out under the Arctic Materials Project. Both, the influence of chemical
composition and the impact of forging process on the mechanical
properties have been evaluated. The main focus of the investigation
was placed on the impact strength and fracture toughness. Transition
curves were recorded to characterize low-temperature toughness
behavior of the different material grades. Many CTOD measurements
at –60 °C with different notch depths were carried out to gain a statistic.
The results of these experiments are interpreted by means of optical
microscopy.
KEY WORDS: Forging; Seamless Ring Rolling; Fracture Toughness;
Impact Strength; Alloying Concept; Forging Procedure.
INTRODUCTION
Fine-grained structural steels were developed to combine good strength
and toughness values together with a good weldability (Kohtz, 1979).
Through years of process engineering and optimization as well as
improvements of the alloy compositions, it was achieved to design
steels for heavy-duty construction with large component safety. Novel
fine-grained structural steels were produced by innovative rolling,
forging and heat treatment strategies and the use of micro-alloying
elements (Heller and Mitze, 1981; Jahazi and Eghbali, 2001;
Khodabandeh, Jahazi, Yue and Bocher, 2005).
From the metallurgical point of view, two opposing processes must be
considered to combine the best properties. To ensure weldability, cold
formability and toughness at low temperatures a reduction of carbon
and an increased purity (low P, S) has to be realized together with a
fine grain. These restrictions result in lower strength, which has to be
compensated by a combination of hardening measures on the
requirements. By these hardening effects, neither the weldability, nor
the cold formability and low temperature toughness is allowed to drop
out. Because unlike the other mechanisms, grain refinement hardening
is advantageous not only to strength but also toughness-enhancing, in
construction materials generally a very finely grained structure is
aimed. In addition the mechanisms of work hardening, solid solution
hardening, precipitation hardening and particle hardening contribute to
the strength but have to be well adjusted not to lead to drawbacks in
toughness.
Whereas the typical application temperatures for common fine grained
structural steels is down to –40 °C in this work the testing of two fine
grained grades was mainly carried out at –60 °C to represent the
conditions in arctic region. A standard fine grained steel chemistry
(F65) is compared to a toughness optimized chemical composition
(F70) to show the influence of the alloying to the low temperature
properties. Different forging procedures (ring rolling and open die
forging) are represented by two types of products: seamless rolled rings
and shafts.
The aim was to demonstrate the base metal performance of the forged
“state-of-the-art” materials and was included in the screening testing of
the Arctic Material Project.
TEST PIECES
The dimensions of the seamless ring-rolled rings were an outer
diameter of 1300 mm, an inner diameter of 1000 mm and a height of
300 mm. The forged shafts had a length of 600 mm and a diameter of
150 mm. The relevant heat treatment thickness T of both types of parts
(wall thickness for the ring, diameter for the shaft) is equal to 150 mm.
Based on this thickness, T, the testing locations were chosen near
surface (T/0), quarter thickness (T/4) and half thickness (T/2).

377
Seamless Rolled Rings EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

The two seamless rings were produced from ingot casting base material
by upsetting, stretching, 2nd upsetting, punching and subsequent ring
rolling. The forging ratios were 10.7 for the F65 grade and 12.3 for
F70, respectively. The F65 ring was produced from an ingot casting
base material sawed to length with one heating up before forging. The
F70 has as origin also an ingot casting, but was pre-forged, sawed to
given dimensions and then forged to the ring which includes two
heating cycles. The forging ratio of both grades will be nearly the same.
Forged Shafts
The total forging ratio of the F65 shaft is 8.0 and of the F70 shaft 6.3,
whereas the stretch forming ratio of both is about 2.7. Indicating the
deformation induced to the part, the stretch forming ratio is the most
important factor for compact size forgings. Since the production of the
parts was chosen to result in similar deformation grades, the influence
of the production process should be very small. Differences will be
expected due to variations in chemical composition and product
geometry.
Heat Treatment
The heat treatment included normalizing, quenching and tempering.
Normalizing and quenching were carried out with the same parameters
for both grades (930 °C, 6 h). For the tempering temperature 540 °C
was chosen for the F65, 560 °C for the F70 grade. The difference in the
tempering temperature is based on experience and specifications of
both materials to achieve good ductility together with good strength
values for each.
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION
The test program included tensile testing, charpy impact testing,
fracture toughness testing and microscopic investigations.
Tensile Testing
Tensile testing was performed according EN ISO 6892-1:2009 at
ambient temperature and –60 ºC with specimen diameter of 10 mm and
with 50 mm gauge length. To take into account the effect of the wall
thickness in the seamless rolled ring and the effect of sampling
direction (anisotropy), specimen were taken from near surface (T/0),
quarter thickness (T/4) and half thickness (T/2) in axial and tangential
direction. Specimens from the shaft were taken from the same depth
levels, whereas the sampling direction was axial.
Charpy Impact Testing
Charpy specimens were cut from the ring in T/0, T/4 and T/2 test
locations in tangential direction and from T/4 in axial direction. The
specimens from the shaft originate from T/0, T/4 in axial direction and
a reduced quantity from T/2. Transition curves (brittle-to-ductile) were
recorded for a temperature range from –120 °C to +20 °C. Testing was
carried out according to EN 10045-1:1990.
Fracture Toughness Testing
The fracture mechanics testing considers three different geometries
(Fig. 1):
- Single Edge Notched Bending with a/t=0.5 – SENB05
- Single Edge Notched Bending with a/t=0.2 – SENB02
- Single Edge Notched Bending with a/t=0.1 – SENB01

The chemical composition of the four different parts of two different

grades is shown in Table 1. Whereas the C, Mn and V content are
lowered in the F70 steel, elements like Cr, Ni, Mo, Cu and Nb have an
increased content. The lowering of C provokes a decline in strength.
The reduction in strength will be compensated by alloying with Cu
(which will result in precipitation strengthening; Jesseman and Murphy,
1984). Ni enhances not only the yield strength but also the ductility
especially in the low temperature range. Cr improves the hardenability.
Mo promotes the fine grain formation and leads to an increase of
strength and ductility. By a reduction of carbide forming V the ductility
is improved as well as by the higher content of Nb leading to a fine
grained microstructure. The carbon equivalent (CE-L) of the two F65
heats and the second F70 heat are almost the same, so a comparison of
the mechanical properties should show the effect of the different
alloying concepts. The heat of the F70 ring has a significantly higher
CE-L, which permits to evaluate the effect of a higher amount of
alloying elements on the mechanical properties. This CE-L will become
an important aspect regarding the weldability tests in the further agenda
of the project. Fig. 1. Geometry of fracture mechanics specimens

Table 1. Chemical composition, in weight-%

Grade Product C Si Mn P S Cr Ni Mo Cu V Nb H CE-L
Ring 0.150 0.190 1.310 0.010 0.010 0.130 0.480 0.050 0.100 0.050 0.015 0.00019 0.453
F65
Shaft 0.150 0.270 1.310 0.006 0.001 0.130 0.450 0.050 0.100 0.053 0.017 0.00013 0.452
Ring 0.07 0.25 0.60 0.007 0.002 0.79 0.85 0.19 1.19 0.003 0.037 0.00015 0.5026
F70
Shaft 0.06 0.20 0.50 0.006 0.003 0.70 0.77 0.19 1.08 0.008 0.037 0.00008 0.4463

378
The three different geometries machined from the F70 forged ring were
chosen to evaluate the effect of constraint on the fracture toughness.
The specimens’ length axes are parallel to the axial direction of the
ring. The following dimensions were used:
- Specimen thickness, t: 50 mm
- Crack depth, a: 25, 10, and 5 mm
- Outer loading span S: 4*t=200 mm
Additional specimens with their length axes parallel with the tangential
direction were also extracted to evaluate possible effect of specimen
orientation on the fracture toughness. Only the SENB05 geometry was
used.
Sub-sized 10 mm x 10 mm SENB05 specimens were extracted at
different positions in the thickness direction of the ring in order to
investigate whether toughness could vary through the wall thickness.
The first part of the defects was made using spark erosion, and the last
part using fatigue loading to obtain a sharp pre-crack. This point is
illustrated in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Introduction of defect in specimen
by spark erosion and fatigue cracking
During testing, the specimens were instrumented with clip gauges
mounted at two different levels above the surface of the specimen. The
reading from the clip gauges was used to extract crack mouth opening
displacement (CMOD) and crack tip opening displacement (CTOD)
from the experimental results. The clip gauges were located 12.7 mm
(upper clip gauge) and 3.7 mm (lower clip gauge) above the surface of
the specimens, as illustrated in Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. Position of clip gauge measurements used
for calculation of CMOD and CTOD
In addition to the clip gauge measurements, the loading was recorded
379
during the tests. The SENB specimens were tested using standard setup
in a 500 kN Instron servo hydraulic testing machine. All tests were
carried out in displacement control. The test temperature was –60°C, as
obtained through testing the specimens submerged in cooled liquor.
The temperature was monitored continuously by means of two
thermocouples mounted on each side of the specimen. The test
temperature was allowed to stabilize for 10 minutes before the testing
was carried out.
After the testing both CTOD and J were calculated based on the
experimental measurements. The CTOD values for the SENB
specimens were calculated according to BS7448, based on the
following equations. The total CTOD, δ, is calculated based on the
contribution from the elastic, δel, and the plastic, δpl, parts:
   el   pl (1)
δel is calculated from:
K2
 el 
 E 
m ys  2 
(2)
 1  
where K is the elastic stress intensity factor, m is constant taken to be
equal to 2, σys is the yield strength taken to be equal to 540 MPa, E is
the elastic modulus taken to be 208 GPa and ν is the Poisons’ ratio
taken to be 0.3.
δpl is calculated from:
rp (t  a )Vp
 pl 
rp (t  a )  a (3)
Where rp is the plastic rotation point taken as 0.44 and Vp is the plastic
part of CMOD, the other parameters are defined in Fig. 3.
Microscopic Investigations
Light optical microscopy at 200x magnification was carried out for all
sampling depths (T/0, T/4, T/2) for all parts. Special attention was paid
to the grain size and the amount of the phases present.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The results of the different investigations described above will be first
presented. Subsequently the relationships between testing results and
the visible effects will be discussed.
Tensile Testing
The yield strength as well as the tensile strength of the F70 ring is
significantly higher than that of the F65 ring by 100 MPa and by,
80 MPa respectively (see Fig. 4). This shows that the alloying concept
is working very well. There is no reduction but an increase in strength
by replacing some amount of carbon mainly by copper (precipitation
hardening) but also by the other increased elements. Both grades show
no or little influence of specimen distance to heat treated surface and
specimen orientation. These rings behave completely as expected (see
section Chemical Composition).
The tensile properties of the shafts are shown in Fig. 5. In contrary to
the rings the differences between the values of F65 to F70 are not as
large, especially regarding the tensile strength. The highest value can be
found for the F65 shaft in T/0 location, but the values decrease with
increasing depth. The tensile strength of F70 remains constant through
the thickness. The yield strength shows a similar behavior: whereas it
decreases with depth for F65 the values remain constant over depth for
the F70. Furthermore the yield strength of F70 is on a higher level than
that of F65 (about 40 MPa).
found in Fig. 6. The –60 °C test show a yield strength varying between
529 and 539 MPa, which is 30–40 MPa above the specified minimum
yield. When comparison is made with room temperature tensile data,
the yield strength is around 30 MPa higher at –60 °C. The difference in
tensile strength is smaller, varying between 15 and 30 MPa higher at
–60 °C.

Comparing ring (Fig. 4) and shaft (Fig. 5), higher strength values for
the shaft can be found for F65, which may be explained by the forging
process of a compact part and its low weight for the heat treatment.
Although the total forging ratio of the shafts is lower than that of the
ring, the deformation occurs in the same direction for each step. The
main deformation direction of the ring changes from axial to tangential
during the process thus in total less deformation in one direction can be
found.

The opposite behavior can be found for F70: the ring shows the higher
strength values compared to the F70 shaft. This can be explained by the
higher content of alloying elements in the heat used for the ring,
represented by the higher carbon equivalent (0.5 in F70 ring compared Fig. 6. Comparison Shaft F70 room temperature to -60 °C
to 0.45 in F70 shaft).
Charpy Impact Testing

Compared to the F65 the charpy values of F70 ring are all at a higher
F65 F70 level, regardless of the sample depth and sample orientation (Fig. 7). In
both materials, the axial samples had the lowest values, which is a
typical effect in ring-rolled products. The so called forging fiber is
oriented parallel to the tangential direction leading to strong values.
Transverse to this direction the values are significantly lower. This is
caused by the fact that the tangential direction is the main deformation
direction for a ring-rolled product (typical influence of anisotropy).

Fig. 4. Tensile testing results of the seamless rolled rings

F65 F70

Fig. 7. Charpy testing results for the seamless rolled rings in different
locations and directions at different temperatures

Fig. 5. Tensile testing results of the forged shaft
Low temperature testing at –60 °C was carried out for four specimens
of the F70 shaft. The mean values at –60 °C together with the values at
room temperature and the requirements of the ASTM A694 can be
The charpy values for F70 decrease with increasing sampling depth of
the samples. From T/0 to T/4 there is only a small effect, but down to
T/2 there is a significant decrease. For F65, the differences in terms of
depth are only marginal and seem to be in the range of scatter. This can
be addressed to the microstructure and will be discussed later. The
increased toughness in the F70 can be attributed to the higher nickel
and lower carbon content.
The forged shafts made of the two grades behave in the same manner as

380
the rings with respect to their impact energy (Fig. 8). Compared to F65
impact strength of F70 is higher for all positions and orientations. For
both materials the differences in terms of sampling depth can be
addressed to scatter, concerning the shafts.
Fig. 8. Charpy testing results for the forged shafts in different locations
and directions at different temperatures
The significant higher values of F70 are likely to be due to the alloying
concept, as it was discussed for the charpy values of the ring before.
Compared to the rings the impact values of the shafts are slightly higher
for both alloys. This can be attributed to the compact design of the shaft
and the production routine where all hot working is done in the same
direction (high amount of stretching). The circumstance that there is no
sampling depth effect on impact strength can as well be addressed to
the compact design and the low weight compared to the ring.
Fracture Toughness Testing
Three different specimens were machined from the F70 ring for
fracture toughness testing, i.e., SENB05, SENB02 and SENB01. The
effect of specimen geometry on the fracture toughness of the specimens
extracted in the axial direction of the ring is shown in Fig. 9. It was
found that the material behaves in a ductile manner at –60 °C. For the
SENB05 geometry, the lowest CTOD value is 0.35 mm. It can also be
noted that there is a clear tendency of increasing CTOD values as the
crack depth in the specimens is decreasing, i.e. a significant constraint
effect can be observed for the fracture toughness.
Fig. 9. The effect of specimen geometry on the fracture toughness for
the F70 material
The effect of specimen orientation on the fracture toughness for the
381
SENB05 geometry can be seen in Fig. 10. First it is noted that
apparently the fracture toughness in the axial direction of the ring is
somewhat lower than in the tangential direction, with minimum CTOD
values of 0.35 mm and 0.84 mm, respectively. However, it is noted that
for the axial direction 10 parallels were tested, whereas only 4 parallels
were tested for the tangential direction. The fracture toughness for the
specimens extracted from the shaft is apparently very high, and the two
specimens tested reached the maximum CTOD of 1.4 mm without
experiencing unstable fracture.
Fig. 10. The effect of specimen orientation on the fracture toughness
for the F70 material
Ten sub-sized 10 x 10 mm sub-sized SENB05 specimens were
extracted at different positions in the thickness direction of the ring in
order to investigate whether the toughness could vary through wall
thickness. The CTOD values measured at –60 °C can be seen in Fig.
11. Specimen No. 1 corresponds to the outer diameter surface of the
ring, and specimen No. 10 corresponds to the inner diameter of the
ring.
Fig. 11. Variation of fracture toughness in the through thickness
direction of the ring (from outside of the ring to the left towards inside
of the ring to the right)
In general high ductile behavior was recorded for most of the
specimens, so that the metering range of the used clip gauges was not
sufficient. Therefore the CTOD values show no real measures, but
correspond to saturation of clip gauges. Two specimens, No. 5 and 6,
experienced unstable fracture, however, at CTOD values > 0.5 mm.
These results indicate that some reduced toughness could be found in
the middle of the wall thickness of the ring.
The fracture toughness for the F65 and F70 materials for the SENB05
geometry is compared in Fig. 12. It can be observed that the lowest
fracture toughness is actually seen for the F70 material (10 parallels)
with a CTOD value of 0.35 mm. For the F65 material the lowest
fracture toughness recorded (out of 5 parallels) is 0.52 mm. However,
the scatter in CTOD values appears to be somewhat smaller in the F65
material.
Investigation of Microstructures
The microstructure of the F65 ring consists of ferrite-pearlite and upper
bainite (Fig. 13 I). With increasing depth (T/0T/4T/2) the grain
size increases slightly. This is caused by a higher degree of deformation
near surface (especially true for ring rolling process) and different
cooling conditions during heat treatment (especially water quenching)
throughout the wall of the part. The amount of ferrite-pearlite increases
at the expense of bainite from surface to mid-thickness. Based on the
microstructure it is expected that the toughness increases by a lower
grain size but decreases with a higher amount of upper bainite. Near
surface the improving effect of low grain size is compensated by the
raise of bainite. In the mid thickness the advantage of the low bainite
content is neutralized by the higher grain size. This is consistent to the
impact values of the F65 ring which differ only marginally between the
different depths.

The F70 ring (Fig. 13 II) also shows a ferrite-pearlite and upper bainite
Fig. 12. Comparison of fracture toughness in F65 and F70 forged rings microstructure with an increase in grain size from 9 to 8 (acc. ISO 643)
with increasing distance to surface. The bainite content is reduced from
T/0 via T/4 to T/2, compared to the F65 a little stronger.

I a) II a) IIIa)

I b) II b) III b)

I c) II c) III c)
Fig. 13. Light Optical Micrographs of the F65ring (I) and F70 ring (II) compared to the F70 (III) shaft
in different locations a) T/0, b) T/4, c) T/2

382
However tensile strength and the impact strength are almost on the
same level throughout thickness. This may be an effect of the copper
precipitation strength contribution (together with the reduced carbon
content leading to lower pearlite and carbide amount), which is
effective all over the wall thickness.
The effect of the forging process is clearly visible in the micrographs,
comparing the microstructure of the two types of parts. For the shafts,
due to the higher deformation in one direction, a lower grain size
compared to the rings can be found for F65 as well as for F70
(Fig. 13 III, F65 shaft not presented here). This can be considered as a
basis for higher tensile properties together with higher ductility
compared to the rings. Besides this effect of the production routine the
shafts of both materials behave in the same manner as the rings in terms
of grain size and bainite content.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the experiments carried out, the following conclusions can be
drawn:
- The tensile properties are mostly homogeneous through the
complete wall thickness, with a significant higher level for the F70
parts compared to the F65.
- The charpy values reveal a strong effect of anisotropy for the F65
ring. The values in axial testing direction are significant lower than
in tangential direction.
- The tensile tests data for F70 steel revealed higher strength at
–60 °C compared to room temperature.
- Charpy testing shows better values for the F70 material compared
to the F65 material in all sampling depth and directions. An effect
of the sampling depth is visible for the rings, not for the shafts.
- The brittle-to-ductile transition temperatures (defined by an impact
energy of 100 J) are in the range of –110 °C for the F70 ring in
tangential testing direction, for F65 ring tangential it is about
–75 °C. For the shafts the transition temperatures are similar (F70
shaft: –115 °C, F65 shaft: –75 °C). The impact energy raises faster
with increasing temperature and show lower scatter, which can be
referred to the compact size and the high stretching ratio of the
shafts.
- The microstructures are as expected: the grain size is very small
and there is a smooth increase in grain size and decrease in bainite
content in higher sampling depths. The differences in carbon
content between F65 and F70 are clearly visible. The shafts
generally have a smaller grain size.
- The fracture toughness testing carried out for the F70 forged ring
(axial direction) at –60 °C showed high CTOD values with a well-
defined constraint effect. The lowest CTOD value of 0.35 mm was
found for the SENB05 geometry.
- For the tangential direction, no low SENB05 values were found; the
lowest value being 0.84 mm.
- As expected, the difference in axial and tangential sampling
direction is pronounced in CTOD testing like it is for the charpy
testing.
- The CTOD was constantly high through the ring wall thickness
1.2 mm on average, with one single value at 0.5 mm, which is close
to the mid-thickness of the ring.
- Comparative SENB05 testing of the F65 ring gave CTOD values of
0.6 mm (± 0.1 mm), which falls within the scatter band for F70.
383
It can be concluded, that for low temperature applications in harsh
environments the F70 material will be the better choice regarding the
mechanical properties. This was shown using two different component
geometries, which are typical for forgings. The fracture toughness
(CTOD) behaves in the same manner as the charpy testing.
Furthermore the weldability of the two grades will decide about the
application. The welding is thereby influenced by the carbon
equivalent: a higher CE-L leads to a more complex welding procedure
due to the possibility of hard spots and embrittlement in the heat
affected zone. Future welding tests of the F70 grade will show if the
high toughness values can also be achieved in the welded condition.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank the Research Council of Norway (Arctic
Materials project supported through the Petromaks programme,
Contract No.187389/S30) and the industry companies ENI, Statoil,
Total, JFE Steel, Nippon Steel Corporation, Miras Grotnes, Scana Steel
Stavanger, Brück Pipeconnections, Trelleborg, Bredero Shaw, Aker
Solutions, Technip and GE Oil and Gas for financial support.
REFERENCES
ASTM A694M-08,“Standard Specification for Carbon and Alloy Steel
Forgings for Pipe flanges, Fittings, Valves, and Parts for High-Pressure
Transmission Service”, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA,
USA, 2008, DOI: 10.1520/A0694_A0694M-08
BS 7448-1:1991, “Fracture mechanics toughness tests. Method for
determination of KIc, critical CTOD and critical J values of metallic
materials”, British Standards Institution, London, UK, 1991
EN 10045:1990 “Metallic materials; Charpy impact test; Part 1: Test
method”; European Committee for Standardization, Brüssel, 1990
EN ISO 6892-1:2009 “Metallic Materials; Tensile testing; Part 1:
Method of test at room temperature”, European Committee for
Standardization, Brüssel, 2009
Heller, W, and Mitze, HJ (1981). “Günstiges Zähigkeitsverhalten bei
guter Schweißbarkeit – Mikrolegierungselemente beeinflussen die
Eigenschaften von Feinkornbaustählen“, Maschinenmarkt, Vol. 87,
pp. 2076–2079
Jahazi, M, and Eghbali, B (2001). “The influence of hot forging
conditions on the microstructure and mechanical properties of two
microalloyed steels”, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol.
113, pp. 594–598
Jesseman, RJ, and Murphy, GJ (1984). “Mechanical Properties and
Precipitation-Hardening Response in ASTM A710 Grade A and A736
Alloy Steel Plates”, Journal of Heat Treating, Vol. 3, No. 3,
pp. 228–236
Khodabandeh, AR, Jahazi, M, Yue, S, and Bocher, P (2005). “Impact
Toughness and Tensile Properties Improvement through Microstructure
Control in Hot Forged Nb-V Microalloyed Steel”, ISIJ International,
Vol. 45, pp. 272–280
Kohtz, D (1979). “Was heißt eigentlich Feinkornbaustahl?”, Der
Praktiker, pp. 278–282