You are on page 1of 9

Materials Science and Engineering A322 (2002) 64 72

www.elsevier.com/locate/msea

Assessment of damage and life prediction of austenitic stainless


steel under high temperature creepfatigue interaction condition
Soo Woo Nam *
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Korea Ad6anced Institute of Science and Technology, 373 -1 Gusong-dong, Yusong-gu,
Taejon 305 -701, South Korea

Abstract

It is understood that grain boundary cavitation is one of the detrimental processes for the degradation of austenitic stainless
steels that reduces the creepfatigue life at high temperatures. A new damage function based on a model for the creepfatigue
life prediction in terms of nucleation and growth of grain boundary cavities is proposed for austenitic stainless steel. This damage
function is a combination of the fatigue and creep terms related to the cavitational damage (cavity nucleation and growth) in the
life prediction equation and is found to be generally applicable to all the materials in which failure is controlled by the grain
boundary cavitational damage. The creepfatigue data from the present and other investigations are used to check the validity
of the proposed damage function, and it is shown that they satisfy the general reliability of damage function. Additionally, using
this damage function, one may realize that all the Coffin Manson plots at the various levels of tensile hold time and temperature
under strain controlled creepfatigue tests can be normalized to make the master curve. Using this master curve, one may easily
calculate the expected creepfatigue life for austenitic stainless steels under tensile hold high temperature low cycle fatigue test
conditions to save much of the testing time and effort. 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Austenitic stainless steel; Creepfatigue; Grain boundary cavitation; Damage function; Hold time

1. Introduction increasing test temperature and/or hold time [48]. It is


well known that the tensile hold time may have the
Many components operating in power-generating most pronounced effect on cyclic life in austenitic stain-
plant are subjected to complex stress-loading cycles at less steels, and life reduction occurs as a result of grain
high temperatures. In order to simulate these loading boundary cavitation [79]. Correspondingly, many lit-
cycles under laboratory conditions, numerous tests have eratures have been focused on tensile hold time effects
been carried out in which creep and fatigue deforma- and creep fatigue life predictions [10,11].
tion are applied simultaneously [1 4]. Among them, Under low-cycle fatigue condition with or without
many tests under strain-controlled with different tensile hold time, the relation between the number of cycles to
dwell time (i.e. creep fatigue interaction condition) are failure (Nf) and the plastic strain range (Dmp) is known
frequently used to simulate the practical loading cycles. to have the following relationship [12,13]:
High temperature low cycle fatigue (LCF) experiment
DmpN af = constant, (1)
with a tensile hold time at the peak tensile strain
(creep fatigue interaction) is one of the tests commonly which is known to be the Coffin Manson equation. In
employed for understanding life limiting phenomena in a LCF test, as the tensile hold time increases, the
many components used in power generation and fatigue life decreases at a fixed test temperature and a
aeronautics. given plastic strain range. Also, if the test temperature
Generally, in studies on total strain-controlled is varied with a given plastic strain range and hold time,
creep fatigue testing, the fatigue life decreases with the fatigue life also changes. Therefore, if one plots the
plastic strain range with respect to the fatigue life
* Tel.: +82-42-8693318; fax: +82-42-8693310. obtained under different test temperatures and dura-
E-mail address: namsw@cais.kaist.ac.kr (S.W. Nam). tions of hold time, one may get as many straight lines

0921-5093/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 2 1 - 5 0 9 3 ( 0 1 ) 0 1 1 1 8 - 2
S.W. Nam / Materials Science and Engineering A322 (2002) 6472 65

as the temperature and hold time vary. Accordingly, cycle is proportional to the plastic strain range. There-
using a Coffin Manson relation obtained for a given fore, the number of nucleated cavities during cyclic
condition, one cannot predict the expected fatigue life loading per unit area of grain boundary, n, is assumed
for other conditions. to be
This presentation introduces a new concept of the
n= P Dmp N, (2)
damage function which can normalize all the Coffin
Manson relations generated under the various condi- where P, Dmp and N are the cavity nucleation factor, the
tions of different strain range, tensile hold time and plastic strain range, and the number of cycles,
temperature. A model for the creep fatigue life predic- respectively.
tion in terms of nucleation and growth of grain These generated cavities are assumed to grow during
boundary cavities [4] is used in the derivation of the the hold time period at the tensile peak strain by grain
damage function. In addition to this function, a new boundary diffusion of vacancies. The Hull Rimmer
parameter called the cavity nucleation factor, is intro- model [14] for the diffusional growth of cavities at grain
duced to explain the relationship between the probabil- boundary is introduced into the model to provide a
ity of cavity nucleation and the density of grain good approximation of cavity growth, but the stress
boundary carbides. term of the original HullRimmer equation had to be
modified as a function of hold time, t, because load
relaxation occurs during the tensile hold time in creep
2. Main damage fatigue interaction;
dA 2ylDgV|(t)
It has been reported by the present author that the = , (3)
grain boundary cavities are formed and grown at car- dt kTl
bides at the grain boundaries in austenitic stainless steel where A is the cavitated area of a given cavity, l is the
under tensile hold during strain-controlled low cycle thickness of grain boundary, l is the cavity spacing, Dg
fatigue [4]. is the grain boundary diffusivity, d is the atomic vol-
The cavities were found to have nucleated during the ume, |(t) is the tensile peak stress relaxation term
fatigue cycle. In other words, the number of cavities during hold time, k and T are the Boltzmans constant
increased with increasing the number of fatigue cycles. and temperature in absolute scale, respectively.
The cavities were observed to grow only under tensile It is assumed that the same repeated process is con-
hold part of strain and not under compressive hold. tinued throughout fatigue cycling until the total cavi-
During the tensile hold period, the peak stress relaxes tated area on grain boundaries reaches its critical value.
with time to give a creep effect thereby leading to cavity The expression for the total cavitated area is given by

&
growth. For steels which have well-defined grain the following Eq. (4).
boundaries and thermodynamically stable phases (for
2 2ylDgV t
example, austenitic stainless steel), the main damage At = P 3/2Dm 3/2
p N
5/2
|(t) dt. (4)
under high temperature creep fatigue interaction is 5 kT 0

reported to be the nucleation and growth of grain At the critical number of cycles to failure (Ncr), it is
boundary cavities. assumed that the load carrying capacity is drastically
reduced by coalescence of grain boundary cavities and
unstable crack growth begins. The failure due to the
3. Proposed life prediction model creepfatigue interaction is then controlled by creep
cavitational damage rather than by a process of fatigue
In 1985, the present author published a paper to crack initiation and propagation. Thus, from the above
introduce a model for life prediction during low-cycle equation, the critical number of cycles to failure by the
fatigue with a hold time at tensile peak strains. This mechanism of cavity formation and growth at the grain

 &
model was based on the idea of cavity nucleation and boundaries is given by [4],
growth at the grain boundaries under creep fatigue
cycling conditions. It was assumed that the mechani- Ncr = C(P Dmp) 3/5
exp( Qg/RT) t
|(t) dt
n 2/5
,
cally generated vacancies during tensile portion of fa- T 0
(5)
tigue lead to cavity nucleation (fatigue effect), which

 
subsequently grow during the tensile hold time period where,
(creep effect). 2/5
4yVlD0
This model rationalized that vacancies are formed C= ,
athermally by plastic deformation during fatigue cycle 5kAt
and cluster to form cavities at the grain boundaries. where Qg is the activation energy of grain boundary
Also, it is assumed that the number of cavities in a diffusion and C is a material-dependent constant. Using
66 S.W. Nam / Materials Science and Engineering A322 (2002) 6472

the experimentally obtained fatigue life at a given con- with the experimental data for AISI 304 stainless steel
dition (i.e. a specific temperature, strain range and and AISI 316 stainless steel for various hold time
tensile hold time), P in Eq. (5) is calculated by formu- periods [4].
lating the experimental life to be the same as the However, the available data used to check the reli-
predicted life at the given condition. Using the calcu- ability of the model was very limited, since they covered
lated value of P, the creep fatigue lives with other with only one or two strain ranges.
strain ranges and hold times can be calculated. Recently, as shown in Fig. 1, the present investigator
This equation for life prediction was verified with observed that the predictions from Eq. (5) using a
published experimental data obtained over a limited constant value of P were poor for various strain range
tests due to the dependence of the cavity nucleation
strain range test conditions [4]. It was shown that the
factor on the plastic strain range (Fig. 2) [7].
predicted creepfatigue lives were in good agreement
This systematic deviation indicates that if different
values of P is used for the different strain range test one
may bring all the plots on one straight line. Therefore,
the cavity nucleation factor, P, in Eq. (2) was assumed
to be a function of plastic strain range [7],
P= P%Dm m%
p , (6)
where P% is a new cavity nucleation factor related with
the density of grain boundary carbide and m% is a
numerical constant whose value is found to be in the
range of 0.5 2. Having the values of P% and m% from
the very limited number of tests for a given tempera-
ture, one may predict fatigue lives for many different
temperature regime.
Substituting Eq. (6) into Eq. (2), the number of
cavities in a cycle is represented by the equation.
n= P%Dm m
p N, (7)
where m= m% +1. From this expression, the modified


equation for life prediction is obtained as follows [7];
Fig. 1. Comparison between predicted lives calculated from Eq. (5)
and experimental lives for AISI 316 stainless steel [2]. The number
Ncr = C%(Dmp) 3m/5
exp( Qg/RT) n 2/5
, (8)
T
adjacent to each datum point indicates the tensile hold time in

 
minutes. where,
2/5
4yVlD0
C%= (p%) 3/5.
5kAt
Using Eq. (8), it is confirmed that the predicted lives
are found to be in good agreement with the experimen-
tal ones, as shown in Fig. 3 [7].
In Eq. (8), C% involves only the material and physical
constants. Excluding C%, the right side of Eq. (8) re-
mains the terms which is related with the cavity nucle-
ation and growth. Therefore, using these terms, one
may derive the cavitational damage function.

4. Physical meaning of the cavity nucleation factor

It is generally believed that cavities are nucleated at


geometrical irregularities on the grain boundaries where
high stress concentration can be developed [1517].
Therefore, it can be assumed that the modified cavity
nucleation factor, P%, is associated with the characteris-
Fig. 2. Variation of the cavity nucleation factor with plastic strain tics of grain boundary precipitates acting as cavity
range for AISI 316 stainless steel [2]. nucleation sites. The creepfatigue test results of the
S.W. Nam / Materials Science and Engineering A322 (2002) 6472 67

gation of phosphorus slow down the diffusion rate to


retard the precipitation of grain boundary carbides, the
density of grain boundary carbides is decreased with
increasing the content of phosphorus as shown in Fig.
4. To quantify the distribution of the grain boundary
carbides, the linear density of the carbides was mea-
sured by an image analyzer with SEM micrographs.
The relationship between the calculated values of P%
and the linear densities of grain boundary precipitates
for the three materials is shown in Fig. 5. P% is found to
be closely related with the density of grain boundary
precipitates giving a linear relationship between them.
Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that P% is a material
constant associated with the characteristics of grain
boundary precipitates.

5. Normalized Coffin Manson relation


Fig. 3. Comparison between predicted lives calculated from Eq. (8)
and experimental lives for AISI 316 stainless steel [2]. The number at The Coffin Manson equation has been shown to
each datum point indicates the tensile hold time in minutes. provide a good method for correlating the continuous
LCF test results for a variety of materials under a wide
three different phosphorus-containing AISI 304L stain- range of temperature [18]. The plastic strain range (Dmp)
less steels were discussed in a previous publication to is the only material deformation parameter required for
establish a physical meaning of P% [7]. Since the segre- measuring damage in this case. However, under creep

Fig. 4. SEM micrographs showing the distribution of grain boundary carbides for three different AISI 304L stainless steels containing: (a) 0.028
wt.% (CSS); (b) 0.09 wt.% (PSS1); (c) 0.209 wt.% (PSS2) of phosphorus.
68 S.W. Nam / Materials Science and Engineering A322 (2002) 6472

6. Damage function

From the above consideration, the damage function,

! & "
DC F, is defined.
t 2/3
exp( Qg/RT)
DC F Dm m
p |(t)dt . (10)
T 0

According to this definition, the Eq. (9) can be reduced


to be the following type.
DC FN 5/3
cr = constant or
ln DC F = lnconstant+( 5/3)lnNcr. (11)
It is realized that Eq. (11) expresses a quantitative
relation between the new cavitational damage function
and the creepfatigue life. It can be seen that Eq. (11)
becomes a mathematical expression of a master curve
which normalizes all the experimental data under many
different creepfatigue test conditions. Therefore, this
Fig. 5. Relationship between the linear density of grain boundary equation can be expressed as a normalized Coffin
carbides and new cavity nucleation factor, P%. Manson relation.The theoretical slope of the double
logarithmic plot between DC F and Ncr is found to be
fatigue interaction conditions, the important life limit- 5/3 or 1.67.
ing factors are test temperature, stress relaxation during
hold time, wave shape and strain range. Based on a
micro-damaging mechanism of a material, the expres- 7. Results and discussion
sion of the damage formation process in terms of these
experimental variables may be defined as the damage Depending on the damage mechanism under creep
function. fatigue conditions, many high temperature materials
Eq. (8), which is proposed for the life prediction on fail by two different failure modes. One represented by
the basis of the grain boundary cavitation, contains austenitic stainless steels and the other by CrMo( V)
above mentioned experimental variables. Rearranging type steels and superalloys. Recently, Choi [8] has
this equation by considering the constant terms (P%, d, shown that tension hold times leading to grain
l, D0, k and At ) in Eq. (8) are considered to be one boundary cavitation are the more damaging in stainless
constant term, one may get a simplified equation which steels than equivalent hold time in compression or
is similar to the Coffin Manson relation as follow: tension and compression hold time [1933]. However,
Cr Mo( V) steels and superalloys are most damaged
 !
Dm m
p
exp( Qg/RT) & t
|(t)dt
"n
2/3
N 5/3
cr =constant.
by the crack-tip deformation mechanisms [3444] dur-
ing compression or tension and compression hold times
T 0 due to strain concentration within the process zone by
(9) Oh and Nam [45]. Similarly, Ostegren [46] also
classified the materials into two groups. In both investi-
And it can be found that the terms in the square gations, it was suggested that the austenitic stainless
brackets are inherently related with cavitational dam- steels are damaged by cavitation under creepfatigue
age. Since Dm mp is related to the number of cavities cycling. So, in this study, the creepfatigue results of
nucleated in every fatigue cycle and the experimental austenitic stainless steels are used to check the proposed
term originates from cavity growth by grain boundary model.
diffusion due to stress relaxation during the hold time The validity of the concept of the new cavitational
period. The physical meaning of the product of these damage function has been checked using the experi-
two terms is that it represents the amount of critical mental results obtained by the present author and other
damage generated by the interaction between creep and investigators [2,19,20], independently. There are numer-
fatigue effects under creep fatigue interaction tests ous test results for creepfatigue interaction of the
with tensile hold. Therefore, one may think this product austenitic stainless steels. However, only the above
term as a damage function, and the above equation can mentioned results could be used to check the model,
be used for normalizing all the experimental data under simply because only they have the data for the stress
creepfatigue interaction with many different test relaxation during hold time in various strain ranges and
conditions. tensile hold time.
S.W. Nam / Materials Science and Engineering A322 (2002) 6472 69

Fig. 6a and Fig. 7a show a typical example of


Coffin Manson plot on creep fatigue result for AISI
304 and AISI 316 stainless steel tested by the present
authors. In this plot, each straight line is needed to
represent the particular relationship between plastic
strain range and fatigue life at each tensile hold time
and temperature. This result implies that the Coffin
Manson relation cannot be used as a generalized
parameters for describing the damaging process occur-
ring during different creep fatigue cycling conditions.
Fig. 6b, Fig. 7b and Fig. 8 show Coffin Manson plots
for the creepfatigue results obtained by other investi-
gators on AISI 316 [2], AISI 304 [19] and INCOLOY
800 stainless steel [20], respectively. These figures also
show that for each experimental condition there is an
equivalent Coffin Manson equation for the particular

Fig. 7. (a) Coffin Manson plot for AISI 316 stainless steel for
different tensile hold time; (b) Coffin Manson plot for AISI 316
stainless steel [2]. The number at each datum point indicates the
tensile hold time in minutes.

condition.
In Eq. (10), the value of the numerical constant,
m(= m%+1), has to be known for calculating the dam-
age function (DC F). As stated previously [7], regarding
the dependence of the cavity nucleation factor on plas-
tic strain range, the value of m% can be calculated from
the slope of a log (plastic strain range)log (cavity
nucleation factor) plot. Fig. 9 shows the variation of
the values of the cavity nucleation factor with plastic
strain range for various materials, and the calculated
value of m% is indicated in the figure.
Substituting the results of the creepfatigue tests
Fig. 6. (a) Coffin Manson plot for AISI 304 stainless steel. The
listed in the Tables III through VII in reference [47] and
number at each datum point indicates the tensile hold time in the values of the numerical constant, m%, for these
minutes; (b) Coffin Manson plot for AISI 304 stainless steel [19]. alloys into Eq. (11), one may get the plots shown in
70 S.W. Nam / Materials Science and Engineering A322 (2002) 6472

Fig. 10 and Fig. 11. As shown in these figures, a linear


relationship between the damage function and the
creepfatigue life is obtained in a double logarithmic
plot, and one can know that it is a normalized form of
Coffin Manson plot with various test conditions. To
see whether our model is valid for other experimental
results conducted by other investigators, as in the pre-
ceding analysis, the other experimental data were used
to check the above concept. Fig. 12a c show the plots

Fig. 10. Normalized Coffin Manson plot for AISI 304 stainless steel.
The number at each datum point indicates the tensile hold time in
minutes.

Fig. 8. Coffin Manson plot for INCOLOY 800 stainless [20].

Fig. 11. Normalized Coffin Manson plot for AISI 316 stainless steel.
The number at each datum point indicates the tensile hold time in
minutes.

of the damage function against the creepfatigue lives


for AISI 316 [2], AISI 304 [19] and INCOLOY 800
stainless steel [20]. The excellent linear relationships are
also found for these materials. Therefore, from the
above results one can confirm that the concept of the
new damage function is generally applicable to the
materials in which the failure is controlled by the creep
cavitational damage under creepfatigue interaction
condition.
Fig. 9. Variation of the cavity nucleation factor with plastic strain Also, the proposed concept is supported by consider-
range for various materials [7]. ing the slope of the straight line in Figs. 10 12. In these
S.W. Nam / Materials Science and Engineering A322 (2002) 6472 71

figures the measured value of the slope of the normal- operational parameters such as working stress level,
ized Coffin Manson plot is found to be l.62 operational temperature, and/or duration of working
l.66. Comparing these values with the predicted value period if the expected life is known.
( l.67) in Eq. (11), it is seen that they are in excellent
agreement with the calculated value of the slope. This
result reasonably supports the fact that the proposed 8. Conclusions
new damage function represents the accumulation of
the creep cavitational damage in creep fatigue cycling. (1) A new cavitational damage function which is
In summary, the proposed model based on the accu- expressed in terms of several experimental variables is

! & "
mulation of cavitational damage on grain boundary is derived.
considered to be a good explanation for defining the t 2/3
exp( Qg/RT)
damage function under creep fatigue condition. The DC-F Dm m
p |(t)dt
significant meaning of this new function is that it can T 0

predict the fatigue life with tensile hold time by estimat- (2) The proposed damage function is shown to nor-
ing a damage function, or it can give the design and malize all the test results of stainless steels under creep

Fig. 12. (a) Normalized CoffinManson plot for AISI 316 stainless steel [2]. The number at each datum point indicates the tensile hold time in
minutes; (b) Normalized CoffinManson plot for AISI 304 stainless steel [19]. The number at each datum point indicates the tensile hold time
in minutes; (c) Normalized CoffinManson plot for INCOLOY 800 stainless steel [20]. The number at each datum point indicates the tensile hold
time in minutes.
72 S.W. Nam / Materials Science and Engineering A322 (2002) 6472

fatigue interaction conditions with high temperature [20] C.E. Jaske, H. Mindlin, J.S. Perrin, J. Eng. Industry ASME 94
tensile hold. It can be used for more accurate life (1972) 930.
[21] R.A. Perkins, R.A. Padgett Jr., N.K. Tunali, Metall. Trans. 4
predictions under creep fatigue conditions in which the (1973) 2535.
failure is controlled by the grain boundary cavitational [22] Y.C. Yoon, S.W. Nam, J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 13 (1994) 1270.
damage than the Coffin Manson relationship. [23] S. Majumdar, P.S. Maiya, J. Eng. Mater. Tech. ASME 102
(3) The modified cavity nucleation factor, P%, which (1980) 159.
is regarded as a material specific constant, is found to [24] P.S. Maiya, S. Majumdar, Metall. Trans. A 8A (1977) 1651.
[25] C.Y. Cheng, D.R. Diercks, Metall. Trans. A 4A (1973) 615.
be closely related with the density of grain boundary [26] R.D. Campbell, J. Eng. Industry ASME 93 (1971) 887.
precipitates which act as cavity nucleation sites. [27] P.S. Maiya, Mater. Sci. Eng. 47 (1981) 13.
[28] A.M. Ermi, J. Moteff, J. Eng. Mater. Tech. ASME 105 (1983)
21.
[29] V.M. Radhkrishnan, J. Eng. Mater. Tech. ASME 105 (1983)
References 273.
[30] C.R. Brinkman, G.E. Korth, Metall. Trans. 5 (1974) 792.
[1] E.G. Ellison, A.J.F. Paterson, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. 190 (1976) [31] R. Hales, Fatigue Eng. Mater. Struct. 3 (1980) 339.
333. [32] D.S. Wood, J. Wynn, A.B. Baldwin, P. Oriordan, Fatigue Eng.
[2] C.R. Brinkman, G.E. Korth, R.R. Hobbins, Nucl. Tech. 16 Mater. Struct. 3 (1980) 39.
(1972) 297. [33] M. Sakane, M. Ohnami, J. Eng. Mater. Tech. ASME 105 (1980)
[3] J. Wareing, Metall. Trans. A 8A (1978) 711. 75.
[4] J.W. Hong, S.W. Nam, K.-T. Rie, J. Mater. Sci. 20 (1985) 3763. [34] K.-T. Rie, E. Lachman, J. Ruge, Advaced in Fracture Research,
[5] J.B. Conway, J.T. Berling, Metall. Trans. A 1A (1970) 324 Proc. 5th Int. Conf. on Fracture, In: D. Francois (Ed.), Cannes,
Comm. France, 1981, p. 2371.
[6] J.B. Conway, J.T. Berling, R.H. Stentz, Metall. Trans. A 2A [35] S.W. Nam, J.W. Hong, K.-T. Rie, Metall. Trans. A 19A (1988)
(1971) 3247 Comm. 121.
[7] B.G. Choi, S.W. Nam, Y.C. Yoon, J.J. Kim, J. Mater. Sci. 31 [36] B.O. Kong, S.C. Lee, S.W. Nam, J. Korean Inst. Met. 29 (1991)
(1996) 4957. 514.
[8] B.G. Choi, M.S. Thesis, Korea Advanced Institute of Science [37] C.R. Brinkman, M.K. Strizak, N.K. Booker, C.E. Jaske, J.
and Technology, Taejon, 1994 Nucl. Mater. 62 (1976) 181.
[9] R. Raj, M.F. Ashby, Acta Metall. 23 (1975) 653. [38] W.J. Elder, J.B. Marriott, M.C. Murphy, Fatigue at Elevated
[10] P. Agatonovic, N. Taylor, Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Creep and Temperature, ASTM STP 520, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 1973,
Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures, In: Institute of p. 320.
Metals, Swansea, England, April 1 6, 1990, p. 803. [39] K.D. Challenger, P.G. Vining, J. Eng. Mater. Tech. ASME 105
[11] P. Agatonovic, N. Taylor, Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Mechanical (1983) 280.
Behaviour of Materials, In: Pergamon Press, Kyoto, Japan, July [40] H. Teranishi, A.J. McEvily, Metall. Trans. A 10A (1979) 1806.
29 August 2, 1991, p. 303. [41] K.D. Challenger, A.K. Miller, C.R. Brinkman, J. Eng. Mater.
[12] L.F. Coffin Jr., J. Eng. Mater. Tech. ASME 76 (1954) 931. Tech. ASME 103 (1981) 7.
[13] S.S. Manson, NASA Technical Note 2933, Cleveland, 1954. [42] T. Endo, T. Sakon, Metals Tech. 11 (1984) 489.
[14] D. Hull, D.E. Rimmer, Phil. Mag. 4 (1959) 673. [43] J.H. Ryu, Ph.D. Thesis, Korea Advanced Institute of Science
[15] R.G. Fleck, D.M.R. Taplin, C.J. Beevers, Acta Metall. 23 (1975) and Technology, Taejon, 1989.
415. [44] D.C. Lord, L.F. Coffin Jr., Metall. Trans. 4 (1973) 1647.
[16] A.S. Argon, Scripta Metall. 17 (1983) 5. [45] Y.J. Oh, S.W. Nam, J. Mater. Sci. 27 (1992) 2019.
[17] J.M. Lee, S.W. Nam, Int. J. Damage Mech. 2 (1993) 4. [46] W.J. Ostergren, Proc. of the ASME-MPC Symposium on creep
[18] L.F. Coffin, J.R. Tavernelli, Trans. Amer. Inst. Mining Metall. fatigue interaction, ASME, New York, 1976, p. 179.
Petro. Eng. 215 (1959) 794. [47] S.W. Nam, Y.C. Yoon, B.G. Choi, Metall. Trans. A 27A (1996)
[19] A.M. Ermi, J. Moteff, Metall. Trans. A 13A (1982) 1577. 1273.