Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
ICM11
Fracture toughness evaluation of 3Cr-1Mo steel from Vickers indentation and tensile test data
A.H. Mohammadi
a,
*, M. Naderi
a
, M. Iranmanesh
b

a
Department of Mining and Metallurgy, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
b
Department of Marine Sciences and Ship Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

Abstract
The 3Cr1Mo steels have a potential for hydrogen and temper embrittlement. In the current study a theoretical model is proposed
to estimate the fracture toughness of 3Cr-1Mo steel from Vickers indentation and tensile test data using the indentation energy to
fracture (IEF) model and substituting ball indenter for Vickers indenter. These predicted values were compared with K
Ic
values
obtained from Rolfe-Barsom equations based on Charpy V-Notch (CVN) impact test results. It was found that the relative error
between estimated fracture toughness from theoretical model and ones calculated from CVN impact test have an admissible
value equal to 17%.

2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of ICM11

Keywords: Fracture toughness; 3Cr-1Mo steel; Vickers indentation test; tensile test; IEF model; CVN impact test
1. Introduction
Low-carbon, low-alloy steels are often used in petrochemical industries and refineries. These steels mainly
contain Cr, Mo or V as significant alloying elements [1]. The CrMo pressure vessel steels have a potential for
temper embrittlement that leads to toughness degradation and decrease of the critical flaw size for brittle fracture [2,
3]. With respect to this fact, there is a growing importance being attached to the assessment of the integrity of such
structures that work at high pressure and elevated temperatures [4].
When assessing the integrity of structural materials, the indentation test is an attractive test technique to obtain
material property data because it is in nature semi-nondestructive and requires a relatively small material volume.
Many theories and models have been developed to measure fracture toughness of materials by indentation
techniques [5-9]. However, since indentation on ductile metals does not induce cracking even at very low
temperatures, the estimation of fracture toughness using the indentation test has been rarely attempted for ductile
metals [6].

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +98-912-215-3014; fax: +98-21-8888-2410.
E-mail address: amir_hossein@aut.ac.ir.
1877-7058 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of ICM11
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.04.041
Procedia Engineering 10 (2011) 228235
A.H. Mohammadi et al. / Procedia Engineering 10 (2011) 228235 229
K
IC
= _
2E
1 -v
2
One of well known model in this field is the indentation energy to fracture (IEF) model was proposed to estimate
the fracture toughness of ferritic steels from ball indentation test data by Byun et al. [10].
The IEF model is based on the assumption that the indentation deformation energy per unit contact area up to a
critical mean contact pressure is equal to the plastic energy portion of the fracture energy per unit area. In the model
an imaginary fracture should be imposed to the indentation deformation. The criterion for the imaginary fracture is
that fracture occurs when the maximum contact pressure reaches the fracture stress of the material [10].
This study is aimed at the development of IEF model by substituting ball indenter for Vickers indenter and
proposing a new equation for evaluation fracture toughness from Vickers indentation and tensile test data.
Eventually the predicted value of K
IC
for 3Cr-1Mo steel which calculated by theoretical model is compared with K
Ic

values obtained from Rolfe-Barsom equations based on CVN impact test results.
2. Theoretical model
Byun et al. proposed an equation for calculating fracture toughness using ball indentation and tensile test data, as
follows [10]:

_w
0
+
2A
2

2
nS
_
np
m
]
4A
_
2m-2
m-2
__
1
2
(1)
K
IC
= _
2E
1 -v
2

Where E is Youngs modulus, is Poissons ratio, W
0
is the lower shelf fracture energy, A is the material yield
parameter, m the Meyer index, D is the indenter diameter, S is the slope of the linear load penetration depth and
P
m
f
is critical mean contact pressure.
By substituting the features of ball indenter for Vickers indenter, equation (1) becomes:

_w
0
+
A
2

2
S
_
p
m
]
2A
_
2m-2
m-2
__
1
2
(2)
p
m
]
= _t
]
I
+
2
S

In this equation p
m
f
is calculated from:

] Ko
n
c
-xnt
]
ID
(S)
e
]
= oc
-xt
]
(4)
t
]
I
=
2AS
n
K

Where K and n are the strength coefficient and work-hardening exponent of the Hollomon-type flow curve, is a
material constant determining the stress triaxiality-dependence of fracture strain, is a temperature-dependent
parameter and the values of and are determined by fitting the results of tensile test with equation (4):


Where
f
is fracture strain and t
f
is stress triaxiality in tensile test.
ID
In equation (3), t
f
is the stress triaxiality for indentation deformation and expressed by:

-
2
S
(S)

230 A.H. Mohammadi et al. / Procedia Engineering 10 (2011) 228235
3. Experimental procedure
3.1. Material and metallography
The investigated material was obtained from an out of service hydro-processing reactor of Tehran oil refining
company. This reactor was manufactured by JSW Co. in Japan. The composition of steel is listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Chemical analysis of the steel
Element C Si S P Mn Ni Cr Mo V Cu Ti Co Al
Wt% 0.1 0.28 0.013 0.011 0.49 0.3 2.7 0.86 0.01 0.22 0.004 0.02 0.004
The specimens for optical metallography were mechanically polished and etched in 2% nital solution and then
observed by optical microscope.
3.2. Indentation tests
The sample for indentation test was grinded and polished by conventional metallographic methods and then
tested by a universal hardness tester which was equipped with a LVDT, using a Vickers indenter with 2mm diameter
and applying various forces on the surface ranging from 10 to 1200 N.
3.3. Tensile tests
To obtain the flow properties, which are needed for calculating the critical mean contact pressure and fracture
toughness, tensile tests were performed using five smooth round bar specimen conducted at room temperature using
an INSTRON model 6027 universal test machine according to BS 2832 standard [11] at a crosshead speed of 5
mm/min. The tensile test using three notched round bar specimen were also performed in room temperature
according to the same standard procedure specified in [11], to obtain the relationships between mechanical
properties and stress triaxiality. Also to determine yield stress in upper shelf temperature for using in Rolfe-Barsom
equation, tensile test for three smooth round bar specimen was conducted in 200C temperature (upper shelf
temperature according to CVN impact test results).
3.4. CVN impact test
Standard CVN impact tests according to ASTM E-23 were performed at the temperature range 0 to 200C, using
an AMSLER model PW-750 test machine.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Microstructure
Fig. 1 shows the microstructure of steel in two magnifications. According to micrographs, carbide distributions
have been observed in the ferritic matrix.

A.H. Mohammadi et al. / Procedia Engineering 10 (2011) 228235 231

Fig. 1. Microstructure of 3Cr-1Mo steel.
4.2. Indentation tests
Fig. 2 shows load indentation diameter curve for Vickers indentation test. This figure illustrates that Vickers
indentation obeys from Meyer law, which correlates the applied load P and the resulting indentation diameter d with
each other:
P = kJ
m
(6)
2


Where m is Meyer index and k is a material constant. These parameters are derived from the curve fitting of
experimental results of indentations. In our study the m and k values were 1.758 and 946.6 respectively.
The value of m is consistent with other reports. According to Onitsch, m lies between 1 to 1.6 for hard materials,
and for soft materials it is above 1.6 [12]. So, 3Cr-1Mo alloy studied in the current research can be accepted as soft
materials.


P=946.6d
1.758
0
200
400
600
800
0 0.5 1 1.5
P

(
N
)
d (mm)
1000
1200
1400
Fig. 2. Load indentation diameter curve for Vickers indentation test.
The relationship between indentation parameters (i.e.,
P
d
versus
d

) is illustrated in Fig. 3.

232 A.H. Mohammadi et al. / Procedia Engineering 10 (2011) 228235
P
J
2

P/d
2
=800.5(d/D)
-0.24
0
500
1000
1500
2000
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
P
/
d
2
d/D
Fig. 3. Relationship between indentation parameters.
By fitting the data to Meyer law [13]:
= A_
J

]
m-2
(7)

The value of A is derived as 800.5 MPa.
The linear load - penetration depth curve is shown in Fig. 4. From the plot, the S value is derived as 32.049
KN/mm.


P=32049h
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
P

(
N
)
h (mm)
Fig. 4. Load penetration depth curve for Vickers indentation test.
4.3. Tensile tests
The mean values of flow coefficients are listed in Table 2.

A.H. Mohammadi et al. / Procedia Engineering 10 (2011) 228235 233
Table 2. The mean values of flow coefficients for smooth specimens
Flow Coefficient K n E
Mean Value 586 MPa 0.049 205.6 GPa

The effect of stress triaxiality on fracture strain is illustrated in Fig. 5. As seen in the figure, the fracture strain
decreases with increasing the stress triaxiality. As stated earlier, to evaluate the critical mean contact pressure as a
criterion for fracture, the relationship between the fracture strain and the stress triaxiality, Eq. (4), should be known
for the test materials. The coefficients of the relationship were obtained from the Fig.5. As seen in the figure,
coefficients of and are 0.96 and 3.133, respectively.

f
=3.133e
-0.96t
f
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

f
t
f
Fig. 5. Relationship between fracture strain and stress triaxiality.
4.4. Fracture toughness evaluation from Vickers indentation and tensile test data
Values of stress triaxility for indentation deformation and critical mean contact pressure are calculated by
equations (5) and (3):
t
f
ID
=2.29
p
m
f
=1640 MPa
When stress triaxility for indentation compared to tensile test, much higher value is evaluated for the indentation,
while this value is similar to ones ahead of the crack tip. The finite element simulation for RPV steels showed that
the stress triaxility at the crack tip was about 2.8 [14-17]. This observation explains the reason of similar fracture
toughness values obtained from the standard fracture mechanics test and the IEF model.
The calculated parameters are required for evaluating fracture toughness from IEF model is summarized in table
3.
Table 3. The calculated parameters are required for evaluating fracture toughness
Parameter m p
m
f
A S W
0
E D
Value 1.758 1640 Mpa 800.5 MPa 32.049 KN/mm 1975 J/m
2
206 GPa 0.28 2 mm
Eventually, fracture toughness of steel is calculated by equation (2):
K
IC
=182 MPam
1/2
234 A.H. Mohammadi et al. / Procedia Engineering 10 (2011) 228235
_
K
IC-us
o
0.2
4.5. Calculating fracture toughness by means of CVN impact test results
Values of impact energy at various temperatures are plotted in Fig. 6. The FATT is defined as the temperature at
which the fracture face contains 50% shear fracture characteristics. The value of FATT measured in the current
work is 75C.
The upper-shelf CVN for pressure vessels has a correlation with K
ICus
as Rolfe-Barsom equation [18]:

]
2
= u.6478 _
CIN
us
o
0.2
-u.uu98] (8)
(99%)
K
IC
K
IC-us

Where
0.2
is upper shelf yield stress and T
us
is defined as the temperature at which the fracture face contains
100% shear fracture characteristics. For our study required parameters are as follows:
T
us
=200C

0.2
= 269.1 MPa
CVN
us
=171.55 J
So the K
IC-us
is calculated by equation (8) as 171.59 MPam
1/2
.
For calculating K
IC
value with 99% certainty, Weibull distribution model [19] is used. According to the model,
for -40 C< T-FATT <350 C:
= u.62S +u.4u6cxp|-u.uu286(T -FATT)] (9)


So the K
IC
is calculated by equation (9):
K
IC
=155.63 MPam
1/2



0
50
100
150
200
0 50 100 150 200 250
I
m
p
a
c
t

E
n
e
r
g
y

(
J
)
Temprature (C)
Fig. 6. Impact energy vs. Temperature for CVN impact test.
The relative error between estimated fracture toughness from theoretical model and ones calculated from CVN
test have a value equal to 17%. The error is relative to material piled up around the indenter during indentation test.
When this happens, more material is supporting the indenter and specimen appears harder than it really is. As a
result, fracture toughness increases by increasing in hardness of specimen.
A.H. Mohammadi et al. / Procedia Engineering 10 (2011) 228235 235
5. Conclusions
This paper proposed a methodology for estimating the fracture toughness of 3Cr-1Mo steel based on the IEF
model and substituting ball indenter for Vickers indenter. Predicted value of K
IC
was compared with K
IC
value
obtained from Rolfe-Barsom equations based on CVN test results. It was found that the relative error between
estimated fracture toughness from theoretical model and ones calculated from CVN test have an admissible value
equal to 17%. The error is relative to material piled up around the indenter during indentation test.
Finally, much higher stress triaxiality is evaluated for indentation test in regard to tensile test, but this value is
similar to the value ahead of the crack tip. This observation explains the reason of similar fracture toughness values
obtained from the standard fracture mechanics test and the IEF model.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank to Eng. Yarandi of research institute of petroleum industry for supplying the material
and Eng. Poshteban and Eng. Naderi of Hamyar Sanat Eghbal Co. for their supports in performing the hardness
measurements.
References
[1] Schlgl et al. Metal Trans A, 2000; 31A:12537.
[2] Iwadate T et al. Corrosion 1988; 44(2):10312.
[3] Iwadate T et al. J Pressure Vessel Tech 1985; 107:2308.
[4] Kermad A et al. PVP, Vol. 336. ASME; 1996. pp. 23166.
[5] D. Nolan, V. Leskovsek, M. Jenko, Surface & Coatings Technology, 201 (2006) 182188.
[6] F.M. Haggag, in: W.R. Corwin, F.M. Haggag, W.L.Server (Eds.), Small Specimen Test Techniques Applied to Nuclear Reactor Vessel
Thermal Annealing and Plant Life Extension, ASTM STP 1204, 1993, p. 27.
[7] Taihua Zhang, Yihui Feng, Rong Yang and Peng Jiang, Scripta Materialia, 62 (2010) 199201.
[8] R. Venkataraman , R. Krishnamurthy, Journal of the European Ceramic Society. 26 (2006) 30753081.
[9] Ralf Lach, Lada Antonova Gyurova1, Wolfgang Grellmann, Polymer Testing, 26 (2007) 5159.
[10] T.S. Byun, S.H. Kim, B.S. Lee, I.S. Kim, J.H. Hong, Journal of Nuclear Materials. 277 (2000) 263-273.
[11] British standard aerospace series, Hydrogen embrittlement of steels-Notched specimen test, BS EN 2832, PP 1-5, 1993.
[12] M. Bektes, O. Uzun, S. Akturk, A. E. Ekinci, N. Ucar, Vickers microhardness studies of Fe-Mn binary alloys, Chinese Journal of
Physics Vol. 42, No. 6,2004.
[13] D. Tabor, The Hardness of Metals, 1
st
ed, London: Oxford University Press, 1951.
[14] H. Kordisch, E. Sommer, W. Schmitt, Nucl. Eng. Design 112 (1989) 27.
[15] G. Wanlin, Eng. Fract. Mech. 51 (1) (1995) 51.
[16] G.Z. Wang, J.H. Chen, Metall. Trans. A 27 (1996) 1909.
[17] K.C. Koppenhoefer, R.H. Dodds Jr., Nucl. Eng. Design 162 (1996) 145.
[18] J.M. Barsom, S. T. Rolfe, Impact testing of materials, ASTM stp 560, PP.281-302, 1970.
[19] T. Iwadate, Life prediction methodology of high-temperature/pressure reactors made of Cr-Mo steels, property of aging materials, PP.
19-26, 2-5 Nov, 1992.