Io

Fatigue Properties o f NonferroustAlloys for Heat Exchangers,

Pumps, and Piping

Assignment 86 1o8MEL R&D Report 232/66

May 19656

By

M. R. Gross and R. C. Schwab

U. S. NAVY1

MARINE ENGINEER-ING LABORATORYI

II apolis, Md/O t P ~ ,~

.601

DedicatcM To- PROGRESS IN MARINE ENGINEERIN(e

Bet.st Available, Copy

Distribution of this document is unlimited.

£~O6 4'?~b OO

Fatigue Properties of NonferrousAlloys for Heat Exchangers,

Pumps, and Piping

Assignment 86 108MEL R&D Report 232/66

May 1966

By

M. R. Gross and R. C. Schwab

M. R. GROSS

R. C. SCHWAB

Approved by:A

)istribution of thi~g"G~~umv,,,t is ur ime- d

46 t% T%

ABSTRACT

The fatigue behavior of 13 nonferrous

alloys used for corrosion-resistant heat

exchangers, pumps, and piping systems was

investigated over a broad life spectrum of

100 to 100-million cycles. Both cast and

wrought copper-base and nickel-base alloys

were studied. It is concluded that wrought

Monel* and forged Ni-Al bronze have the

highest fatigue strengths, whereas gun metal

and valve bronze have the lowest. The effect

of salt water on fatigue performance was not

found to be highly significant. The use of

Langer's equation to predict stress-cycle

relationships gave satisfactory results for

wrought alloys but appeared to be overly con-

servative for cast alloys.

II

*Registered trade name of the International Nickel Company,Incorporated. C

iii

MEL Report 232/66

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

!RIBUTION LIST ii'RACT iii:ODUCTION 1:RIALS INVESTIGATED 2[OD OF TEST 2oURE CRITERIA 4rLTS OF TESTS 5'ARISON OF FATIGUE STRENGTHS 6!LUSIONS:RENCES

8

OF FIGURESFigure 1 - Drawing, Rotating Cantilever Beam

Fatigue SpecimenFigure 2 - Drawing, Low-Cycle Fatigue SpecimenFigure 3 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, Gun Metal

(Cast)Figure 4 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, Valve

Bronze (Cast)Figure 5 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, Ni-Al

Bronze (Cast)Figure 6 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, Ni-Al

Bronze (Forged)Figure 7 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, Superston

40 (cast)Figure 8 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, 70-30

Cupronickel (Cast)Figure 9 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, 70-30

Cupronickel (wrought)Figure 10 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, 90-10

Cupronickel (Hard)Figure 11 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, Cufenloy

40 (Annealed)Figure 12 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, Cufenloy

40 (DSR)Figure 13 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, Cupro-

nickel 707 (Wrought)Figure 14 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, Monel

"E'T (Cast)Figure 15 - Curve, Flexural Fatigue Curves, Monel

(Wrought)

v

Introduction

Many copper-base and nickel-base alloys are used in the con-

struction of heat exchangers, pumps, and piping systems designed

to handle fresh or saline water. In the selection of materials

for such applications, consideration is given primarily to corro-

sion resistance, erosion resistance, and heat transfer charac-

teristics. In most applications the applied stress levels are

low. Accordingly, the structural strength properties of the

materials are relatively unimportant.

In recent years, more and more attention has been given to

the structural properties of these alloys because of (1) cost and

weight reduction programs, (2) conservation of strategic materials,

(3) development of new high-strength alloys, and (4) new applica-

tions which impose high stress levels. Typical of the latter are

sea-connected cooling systems for hydrospace vehicles.

One of the most likely modes of mechanical failure in systems

undergoing cyclic pressurization or thermal shock loading is

metal fatigue. The frequency of stress cycling in such systems

may vary from that of an occasional start-up and shutdown to

vibrational forces developed by the movement of the heat-exchanger

fluids. Little or no published information on the alloys used in

this type of service was found in reviewing the literature several

years ago. Accordingly, tests were conducted at the U. S. Navy

Marine Engineering Laboratory to establish the fatigue behavior of

1

ariety of corrosion-resistant nonferrous alloys. The results

these tests are presented in this paper.

.erials Investigated

The 13 alloys investigated are listed in Table 1, together

-h their chemical compocitions and tensile properties.

.luded are the strength coefficient, K, and strain-hardening

)onent, n, contained in the true-stress/true-strain relaticn-

Lp:

a = K en

ýre are some deficiencies in the tensile properties of the cast

:erials with respect to the governing specifications. This is

be expected inasmuch as the specification requirements are

aally based on separately cast test coupons, whereas the values

ven in Table 1 were obtained on specimens removed from cast

ates.

thod of Test

Two types of flexural fatigue specimens were used in the

vestigation. The high-cycle fatigue tests were performed with

tating cantilever-beam specimens having the dimensions shown in

gure 1. These were constant deadweight load tests with a cycle

equency of 1450 cpm. The smooth test lengths were circum-

rentially and longitudinally polished to a metallographic

nish.

2

T -1 P4 14 -~ -Y CY - - u

w 0.0 0 I % C 0 O

.0 0 ~ now ~ 1 - .. 4 .. C u Cuý CCu

& .1A 0 0 ' 0' 0A . 4 1 4 j a ' L CYa01

Cu .4 0NI-

-

0 0 0 0 0 0\ 00

A, e\ 0 04 D-4 1N 4.4 .-4 ,.4 N gr

0 0Ný

M) . Z-. 0 - ') 0%t- 0 X

0 '.4 '.4 '4 Cu Cuoo W LV.C R ý 0 ý N :

41 0 ' '0a

I.,44.. 1, 0-4 0. 0 0 'Do "$4.~C Cu 0 .

4) 0 Ca -C '. Cu

04 CQ

o4 14 - 05-4 CC, 14 n

r-4 f. IC-0 0 0

CC 0 0 0

A 5 c u. D, N, c0,

P1 00 0' 0 0

CQ Uý OCýC a\. 0D 0

~1~0 0 0~ 0 01

0 0\ N ' rý -4 -4 0 r N

o4 = 0 0c U-% C' v 0 0% 0 C' Cu LC C'co -4' q,\ Cl C.x

U)r

ok 0 0 aC)\ * r N' '

c- 10 -q14 0 -4 -4 C\J- c'cr 4 ,I-0

r4 -0 I B ?' I '

C P .4 - 4mP~ m- 4-

0F 0 -- - - - -- 140 C 0 u0 x0 '0 2 :u

-A44 41 Ai 41 1 4 14 1 1 4 1 1 0'00 U* ta toU U 1

u u & u U ) $4 Im41 4cC

C_ __ oc 1 - 1 4 41 41

-4 C

410 10 0 '

E 51 c4-I L 0000 004C C 041 -4 j"0 E> cE C' 4 c0 1 14 X C 14 _14 4.4 X 4 Q 41 4D 41 0

ru w1 I'.,- w4 1.3 0 : -0 0 ~0 0 0I0 :3 0 al0 0o UE-CJ______ > m > zZ C tC U - a' U L(. 4 al z m_ *)-

t5 U u ,Itu -t Qc j

The low-cycle fatigue tests were performed with equipment

ibed previously.' Flat flexure-type specimens having the

sions shown in Figure 2 were used. The short end of the

men was held stationary, while the long end was flexed

en mechanical stops by a hydraulic piston. One or more

n gages (0.25-inch gage length) were attached to the mini-

est section to record the longitudinal strain. The applied

ng force was measurpd with a load cell. The total strain

ACT, was obtained from strain gage readings, and the

al bending-stress range was calculated from elastic stress

las using the measured load range. Specimens were cycled

^pm.

All of the fatigue tests were of the completely reversed

(Fatigue ratio = -1). Whereas most of the specimens were

d in air, a few were tested with Severn'River water con-

usly wetting the test surface. Severn River water is a

ish estuary water containing 1/6 to 1/3 the salt content

tural seawater, depending on the season and the tide.

ous fatigue tests in both Severn River water and natural

ter havF. shown no significant differences in the effects

e two media.

re Criteria

Failure in the high-cycle, rotating cantilever-beam tests

sted of complete fracture. Failure in the low-cycle fatigue

4

tests was defined as one or more surface cracks 3/16 to I/4 inch

in length.

Results of Tests

The results of the tests are plotted in log-log form in

Figures 3 through 15. Two methods have been used in analyzirvj

the data. The top graph in each figure is the SR vs N relation-

ship for the data, where SR is the nominal reversed bending

stross and N is Lhe number of cycles to failure. SR was calcu-

lated from the elastic stress formula

SR =21~

where AM = bending moment range, in-lb.

c = distance from neutral axis to outermost fiber at

minimum cross section, in.

I = moment of inertia of minimum cross section, in.4

The bottom graph in each figure is the SPE vs N relationship

for the data, where SPE is the reversed pseudoelastic or apparent

elastic stress calculated as follows:

SPE = 6ET.E ..... (2)

2

where ACT = total strain range as determined from strain gages

on the test section, in/in.

E = modulus of elasticity (Table 1), psi.

5 -

urvilinear relationship between Spr and N was obtained by

fitting the following relationship to the data.

_PE = c + SE .....

Nm

C and m = best-fit constants

SE = endurance limit or fatigue strength at 10s

cycles, psi.

_st-fit equation for the SPE vs N data is given in each

a.

Equation (3) is a generalization of the following equation

sed by Langer 2 for predicting the SPE vs N fatigue curve

tensile test data.

_ E in ( 00 +S ..... (4)

RA = reduction of area, percent.

Ihe dashed line in each figure is Langer's predicted curve

on Equation (4) and the tensile data presented in Table 1.

Mhe triangle symbols in graphs represent specimens which

been continuously exposed to salt water during the fatigue

:ison of Fati(,ue Strengths

rable 2 represents an attempt to rationalize the fatigue

"ror the 13 alloys investigated. The SR and SpE values were

from the curves in Figures 3 through 15. The values in

:olumn were then ranked in order of decreasing fatigue

6

strength. An average rank for each material is shown in the

right hand column.

Table 2

Comparison of Fatigue Strengthsof Alloys Investigated

Fatigue Strength At.105 Cycles 105 Cycles 106 Cycles

5R 3PE SR 5PE bR bPE AverageAlloy Type Condition ksi ksi ksi ksi ksi ksi Rank

Gun Metal Cast As-cast 35(12) 96(12) 17(12) 25(12) 6(12.5) 8(12.5) (12.2)

Valve Bronze Cast As-cast 32(13) 52(13) 16(13) 17(13) 6(12.5) 8(12.5) (12.8)

Ni-Al Bronze Cast As-cast 78(6) 210(5) 46(4) 48(7) 29(3) 30(3) (4.7)

Ni-Al Bronze Forged Annealed 110(l) 230(3) 65(1) 64(1) 35(1.5) 37(1) (1.4)

Superaton 40 Cast As-cast 83(4) 230(3) 44(5) 50(5) 25(5.5) 25(5.5) (4.7)

70-30 Cupronickel Cast As-cast 70(8) 130(11) 32(10) 27(11) 13(11) 14(11) (10.3)

70-30 Cupronickel Wrought Annealed 57(11) 180(7) 29(11) 54(2) 25(5.5) 25(5.5) (7.0)

90-10 Cupronickel Wrought Hard 74(7) 160(8.5) 38(7) 40(8) 21(8) 21(9) (7.9)

Cuf!nloy 40 Wrought Annealed 58(10) 230(3) 35(8) 38(9) 26(4) 26(4) (6.3)

Cufenloy 40 Wrought DSR 100(2) 160(8.5) 48(3) 50(5) 20(9) 23(7.5) (5.8)

Cupronickel-707 Wrought Annealed 90(3) 190(6) 50(2) 50(5) 22(7) 23(7.5) (5.1)

Monel "E" Cast As-cast 62(9) 155(10) 34(9) 36(10) 16(10) 16(10) (9.7)

Monel Wrought Annealed 80(5) 350(1) 40(6) 52(3) 35(1.5) 33(2) (3.1)

Note: Numeral in ( ) is rank of value.

Conclusions

From the data and curves presented in Figures 3 through 15,

the following conclusions have been reached relative to the

unnotched fatigue behavior of the materials investigated.

e Variations in fatigue strength or life are greater for

cast alloys than for wrought alloys.

7

* The fatigue strength of a wrought alloy is superior to

;t of a cast alloy of comparable chemical composition.

* Wrought Monel and forged Ni-Al bronze have the highest

igue strengths, whereas gun metal and valve bronze have the

-est.

o Stress-cycle relationships predicted by Langerts equation

generally satisfactory for wrought alloys but appear to be

rly conservative for most cast alloys.

* Salt water does not have a highly significant effect on

fatigue behavior of the alloys investigated.

erences

Gross, M. R., "Low-Cycle Fatigue of Materials for Submarine

Construction," Naval Engineers Jour, Vol. 75, No. 5, Oct

1963, pp. 783-797

Langer, B. F., "Design of Pressure Vessels for Low-Cycle

Fatigue," Jour of Basic Engineering, ASME Trans. Ser. D,

Vol. 84, Series D, No. 3, Sep .962, pp. 389-402

8

(3i

CL a

201

I w

o 0)

, 41

41

0

CY

IAJ

nili

(ww

u

LL..Li

0

CZ-J

1w

'V W

Title and Legend for Figures 3 Through 15

Title

Flexural Fatigue Curves

Legend

O - Rotating Cantilever Fatigue Tests, Air

A - Rotating Cantilever Fatigue Tests, Salt Water

0 - Low-Cycle Fatigue Tests, Air

A - Low-Cycle Fatigue Tests, Salt Water

0 L6

ImI

0

0 01

0 IU

Ig

I C §8.-------- O*A34s

111111 IS 111

r

zN

______ _____.

Io

KIA USo

- (ISA S

z -

I-n

z

0

IV M

() ' US

• "a

I2N

/ -/ -I

II I I_ __llI I i I

0

zz L6

; UI

z I D 0 9

I 0 /

US.

(Isil) ýs

16-

I I

0- 01

P-- -4

z

p-o

0") 3d s

Tf I I II I I TI I III I I

00

I*/ Dcl CU.

dh/N

(I\N I's

-. I 11 lii I 'l' '1 I "01 1 II i

0

"4 3IZ

,Ixz '-

0 0

A

- /ilcm 2

- A-3 ZI -':

--

--

/4 "_ 0-

/ ,o II--- =--

IIII 11 I I ! ll I IH i l I

-. 8 2l:)

OS I

/ -

III I I TFTT-I TT1

0

0

/1 -z

z

/ -

I'/ -//

,.1 1 1 1 I ! I l ll ! ! f I1| [ I /IS ,-, U

37 ' r r I IFIFVf I I I I Irr T I

01 z

ZI7IU

o

0

I z t

Z~76-

(IS),)_ US

1is:•) as -

•II, I i i iIlI I i I , •

"I

IAI

,II

- 4.

v x.

l/O/A

// /z

/ -

0B 0'0

/I

fill ! I ll I I I II I4 0, •

( , U

US0 --_______ 0111111 I I -

j

N- 0

I §II 2o.0 8

_____ I_______ oz - '.4

InIn

uJ

-I w

0 0/

/

� /ze� � -J

5�dS yz

0

/ U

I-/ U- I.,

// z 0I U.

I In

______ I ____ '90

//

111111 I I 1111111 I .11111 '.40

(ls�)

- �

(IsgI) b S

7iii I I I111 1 -11111

'3 IG

- -Z

I0 0 z

AA4A

wl a

z 0z

U, M

3S_

(in in

0 0

1r rr l II ' 1l I I ,0

DN

I

0-

I-

o I

ac

z!

a- U.

I11 1 I t I I fil I Il l I I I •

( ,

Secunty Classification UNCLASSIFIED

DOCUMENT CONTROL OATA - R&D)Security claeesifcetato of title "dy of abotrlct and indexin, wanotation muar be entered when the overall repouf to cltav fied)

iINATIN G ACTIVITY (Corporate author) 2A RCPOM'P SECURITY C LASSIFICA TION

S. Navy Marine Engineering Laboratory UNCLASSIFIEDapolis, Maryland 21402

IRT TITLE )

igue Properties of Nonferrous Alloys for Heat Exchangers, Pumps,Piping

:RIPTIVE NOTES (Type of report and incluaive datee)

4OR(S) (Laet nanie., ftrt name, Initlal)

oss, M. R. and Schwab, R. C.

)RT DATE 7a. TOTAL NO. OF PA GES 7b NO. Or Pcps

May 1966 23 24TRACT OR GRANT NO. $a. ORIGINATOR'S REPORT NUM8ER(S)I

)aNO. 232/66

9b. OTH4E~R 0PORT NOMS (Any othet numberm that may be aast&7*d

MEL Assignment 86 108I IL AUILITY/LIMITATION NOTICES

tribution of this document is unlimited.

PLEMENTARY NOTES 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY

TRACT

ae fatigue behavior of 13 nonferrous alloys used for corrosion-Bsistant heat exchangers, pumps, and piping systems was inves-igated over a broad life spectrum of 100 to 100-million cycles.ith cast and wrought copper-base and nickel-base alloys weretudied. It is concluded that wrought Monel* and forged Ni-Alconze have the highest fatigue strengths, whereas gun metalid valve bronze have the lowest. The effect of salt water onatigue performance was not found to be highly significant. The3e of Langer's equation to predict stress-cycle relationshipsave satisfactory results for wrought alloys but appeared to be;erly conservative for cast alloys.

(Authors)

tegistered trade name of the International Nickel Co., Inc.

Fj.1t 14O 7 3 UNCLASSIFIEDSecuritv Claumifieatinn

Security Classification UNCLASSIFIEDKYWRSLINK A LINK 0 LINK C __

MOLK WY ROLE WT MOLl WTi

Nonferrous alloysFatigue behavior, strengthPiping systems2opper-base alloys. ickel-base alloys:ast and wrought alloys3alt water effect

INSTRUCTIONS

ORIGINATING ACTIVITY: Enter the name and address imposed by security classification, using standard statementsthe contractor, subcontractor, grantee. Department of De- such as:

i-se activity or other organization (corporate author) issuing (1) "Qualified requesters may obtain copies of thisa report. report from DDC."

L. REPORT SECURTIY CLASSIFICATION: Enter the over- (2) "Foreign announcement and dissemination of thisI security classification of the report. Indicate whetherRestricted Data" is included. Marking is to be in accord- report by DDC is not authorized."ice with appropriate security regulations. (3) "U. S. Government agencies may obtain copies of

this report directly from DDC. Other qualified DDC,. GROUP: Automatic downg~rading is specified in DoD D1isr-halrqes hogctive 5200. 10 and Armed Forces Industrial Manual. Enter users shall request through

a group number. Also, when applicable, show that optionel .arkings have been used for Group 3 and Group 4 as author- (4) "U. S. military agencies may obtain copies of thised. report directly from DDC. Other qualified users

REPORT TITLE. Enter the complete report title in all shall request throughVital letters. Titles in all cases should be unclsssified.a meaningful title cannot be selected without classifica-in, show title classification In all capitals in parenthesis (5) "All distribution of this report Is controlled. Qual.mediately following the title. ified DDC users shall request through

DESCRIPTIVE NOTES: If appropriate, enter the type of __V 00port, e.g., interim, progress, summary, annual, or final. If the report has been furnished to the Office of Technicalve the inclusive dates when a specific reporting period is Services, Department of Commerce, for sale to the public, indi.vered. cate this fact and enter the price, if known.

AUTHOR(S) Enter the name(s) of author(s) as shown on IL SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES: Use for additional explana-in the report. Enter last name, first name, middle initiaL tory notes.m'ilitary, show rank and branch of service. The name ofa principal author is an absolute minimum requirement. 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY: Enter the name ofthe departmental project office or laboratory sponsoring (pay.REPORT DATE. Enter the date of the report as day, ing for) the research and development. Include address.

,nth, year, or month, year. If more than one date appears

the report, use date of publication. 13. ABSTRACT: Enter an abstract giving a brief and factualsummary of the document indicative of the report, even though* TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES: The total pgLe count it may also appear elsewhere in the body of the technical re-ubd foplle normalpaginationproedure, enterport. If additional space is required, a continuation sheet shallmber of pages containing Information. attached.

SNUMBER OF REFERENCES: Enter the total number of It is highly desirable that the abstract of classified resorts"erences cited in the report. be unclassified. Each paragraph of the abstract shall end with

. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER: If appropriate, enter an indication of the military security classification of the in-Sapplicable number of the contract or prant under which formation in the paragraph, represented as (TS), (s). (C). or (U).S report was written. There is no limitation on the length of the abstract. How-

8 &, & &d. PROJECT NUMBER. Enter the appropriate ever, the suggested length is from 150 to 225 words.litary department identification, such as project number,oproject number, system numbers, task number, etc. 14. KEY WORDS: Key words are technically meaningful terms

or short phrases that characterize a report and may be used asORIGINATOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S): Enter the offi- index entries for cataloging the report. Key words must be

it report number by which the documpnt will be identified selected so that no security classification is required. Identi-J controlled by the originating activity. This number must fiers, such as equipment model designation, trade name, militaryunique to this report. project code name, geographic location, may be used as key

OTHER, REPORT. NUMB•ERS): If the report hasbe" words but will be followed by an indication of technical con.O ER REPORT. NU-.ER(S): If the repo.rt has been - -

signed any other report numbers (either by the origInator text. The assignment of links, rals, and weights is optional.by the sponsor), also enter this number(s).

AVAILABILITY/LIMITATION NOTICES: Enter any lIm-tione on further dissemination of the report, other than those

,JAoN6 1473 (BACK) UNCLASSIFIED