International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)

ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 3 Issue 11, November-2014

Detection of Creep Damage and Fatigue Failure

in Thermal Power Plants and Pipelines by
Non-Destructive Testing Techniques. A Review
Aakash Kumar* Sudheer Mathuriya Supriya Shilpi
Dept. of Material Science and Dept. of Chemical Engineering and Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Metallurgical Engineering Technology Kalinga Institute of Industrial
Maulana Azad National Institute of Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology
Technology Technology Bhubaneshwar, Odisha, INDIA
Bhopal, M.P., INDIA Bhopal, M.P., INDIA

Abstract— Analysis of creep damage in steels used in the power
generation industry is usually carried out by means of
traditional creep detection techniques, but the several
shortcomings of these methods have induced a search for
alternative non-destructive testing techniques, varying from
ultrasonic to electromagnetic methods. During high temperature
creep there are significant changes in the microstructure such as
dislocation movements and grain boundary cavities. Magnetic
hysteresis measurements have been used to evaluate fatigue and
creep damage in power plant welded joints. A critical review of
RT
the main results obtained for the different stages of creep is
presented in this paper, and the pros and cons of each method
are discussed separately. Some methods are very promising like
ultrasonic testing method, but the limitations are to be removed
IJE
It is commonly accepted that the voids that are created by the
nucleation of cavities due to dislocations due to grain
boundary sliding, tend to align themselves perpendicularly
with respect to the direction of the applied load [2,3]
subsequently converging into microcracks and finally
macrocracks which lead to creep damage and fatigue failures
[4,5]. Since cracks may grow and propagate very quickly,
which may cause sudden failure of the materials, it is of great
importance to detect creep damage in its early stages. It is
rational to assume that, in components subjected to uniformly
distributed mechanical loads and thermal stresses, creep and
fatigue damage will also be wide spread (throughout the
volume of the component) and multiple cracks will grow and

with further research before they are employed on industrial propagate over a considerable large part of area of the
scale. component. [6]. Critical locations are to be monitored
regularly where failure is likely to originate. In particular,
Keywords— Creep, ultrasonic, pipeline steels, hysteresis initial failures due to localized creep in welded parts of the
component are of primary concern for the power generation
INTRODUCTION industry. Following a suggestion by [7], cracks in welded
parts are commonly classified into four types, depending on
Creep is the phenomenon of a material to deform permanently their location.
under influence of different mechanical loads. It can occur due
to the influence of high levels of mechanical and thermal
stresses that are below the yield strength of the material. Three
stages of creep are shown in the plot of strain versus time as
shown in Fig. 1. After the application of load, a sudden strain
is observed, followed by the primary stage during which the
strain rate decreases, until a steady creep rate is reached, this
secondary stage of creep, characterized by a slow but constant
plastic flow of material, usually accounts for the longest part
of the creep life of a component. Then finally it reaches the
tertiary stage, the strain increases considerably and the
component finally fails. This behavior is the cumulative result
of several mechanisms operating independent of each other. In
the ranges of temperature and stress commonly encountered in
engineering applications, the most significant causes of creep
at a micro level are the motion of dislocations and the
diffusion of vacancies [1].

Fig 1. Typical creep curve with evolution of microstructural damage along

with the various techniques studied.

IJERTV3IS110800 www.ijert.org 1147

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)

The first and second type originate inside the welded part but
the third and fourth type cracks are produced at the heat
affected zone. Type three especially occurs at the coarse
grains areas of the material whereas type four cracks occur at
the narrow fine grained region. The component material in
this area has lower creep strength [8], [9] and [10] and
therefore represents an initiation site for the occurrence of
creep cracks, which can arise as a result mechanical, thermal
and residual stresses [11]. The concentration of cavities is
usually much greater in this area and that Type four cracks are
the most usual causes of creep damage and fatigue failure for
ferritic steel pipes and thermal boilers in power
stations [12], [13], [14], [15] and [16].In case of stainless
steels, it is observed that cracks normally occur at the strain-
hardened areas which are close to the welded parts that have
not been undergone heat treatment for the removal of internal
residual stresses [17] and [18].
TECHNICAL DIAGNOSTICS
During the operation period, fatigue of steam line components
occur. Degradation of material properties and deformation of
elements are accelerated due to the exploitation and repair
errors, therefore regular diagnosis of the materials are required
for better maintainence. In this way, processes that could lead
to the creation of system damage are under systematic control,
what is also the legal obligation imposed by the regulations,
directives and harmonized standards. Properly conducted
technical diagnostics protects parts of the steam line from
accident, and also ensures safer conditions for employees as
RT
well as rational techno-economic exploitation and
maintenance.
NDT TO DETERMINE FAILURE
IJE
For purpose of detection of causes of fatigue failures and
creep damage the steam line pipe steels should be best suited
for normal visual inspection, it should possess magnetic
property so that magnetic methods can be used, it should be
continuous for applying ultrasonic methods and hardness tests,
it should be chemically stable so that different dye penetrant
tests are performed for the detection of creep cracks and the
most important factor being the internal defects that are
produced during the manufacturing stages of the components
should be avoided because these internal defects interfere with
some NDT techniques and the data recorded are not accurate
and reliable. If necessary, other tests that would give us a
reliable and useful results to determine causes of failure could
be done.
1. ULTRASONICS
Ultrasonic testing techniques have long success history in
many NDT use both in lab conditions and on field
applications, but its use for the detection of creep in the
primary stages has given combined results that hinders its
applications in most industries. The sensitivity, accuracy and
efficiency of ultrasonic testing has considerably improved
over the years. But, the application of ultrasonic testing at the
critical working temperatures of power plants is a major area
of research as most of the results from earlier data are
recorded at normal cryogenic temperature.
IJERTV3IS110800
(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 3 Issue 11, November-2014
1.1. Wave Velocity
Ultrasonic wave velocity calculations are dependent mainly
on the variations in material properties of the component such
as
density and modulus of elasticity which are indeed due to the
variations in the microstructure geometry. The
correspondence among porosity of the material and velocities
of the ultrasonic waves have been analyzed in previous
papers [19] and [20], but many additional factors join
together to cause velocities to change with their respective
creep life. Variations depend on material property, wave
property and also the directions of wave propagation and
polarization and of the applied stress [21]. In the initial stages
the change is small and thus it is very tough to determine the
crack in the field [22], also because of the material defects
and inhomogeneities that are present in the sample material
under observation [23]. It is also assumed that the estimation
of porosity in the later stages is also possible with this
technique [22] and [24]. Tests were performed on the aged
sample of Cr-Mo and the results showed that the variation in
the velocity was increasing with the ageing time. The above
result is due to the formation and broadening of the
intermetallic precipitates [25].
1.2. Birefringence
This phenomenon is purely based on the difference between
the velocities of two longitudinal waves which are polarized
orthogonally. As the accurate data of the two velocities are
not determined, calculations of the actual velocities of the
waves are very sensitive for the determination of creep cracks
and fatigue failures. The proposed principle states that, since
microcracks are oriented with the internal cavities, along the
direction of main thermal stress, the changes in the velocities
of the two waves in two orthogonal directions will vary along
with the complete creep life of that material. It has been
observed that birefringence changes are really very tedious
with respect to the porosity and creep life of the material [26].
It is higher than the normal scattering of a material caused by
its material defects and calculation validity [21], [27].
1.3. Wave attenuation
There are certain controversial conditions on the possibility
of using wave attenuation for the evaluation of creep and
fatigue damages. This method is not preferred over wave
velocity because small difference in grain size index (N)
would create large variations of the attenuation coefficient
[22], [28], [29]. Some however, claim that the attenuation
coefficient produces a greater sensitivity to creep and fatigue
damage than the ultrasonic wave velocity technique [24] and
[30]. In the work [30], [31] the attenuation coefficient
variation is not monotonic in nature but there are certain
relationship with different creep stages. A maximum is
reached at 30–60% of creep life, depending on the material
and the temperature of application.
1.4. Backscatter
This advanced method is based on the study of ultrasonic
backscattering. Microstructural features such as grain
boundaries, inclusions, cavities and micro cracks create a
partial reflection of the ultrasonic wave; a frequency analysis
www.ijert.org 1148

of the signals received between the excitation pulse and the
arrival of the first back-wall echo is then conducted to obtain
information on the state of the material. The parameter most
commonly used is the integral of the amplitude versus
frequency spectrum. Material noise due to inhomogeneities
can cause large errors at early stages, while coarsening of
precipitates and other microstructural changes due to thermal
ageing can affect the results obtained with this method [32].
However, a detectably greater backscatter is produced by the
development of micro- and macro crack in the final stages of
creep life [33, 34].
Unlike other ultrasonic techniques, backscatter can be used
for the evaluation of localized creep. Destructive
metallographic analyses of crept specimens, including
weldments, confirmed in each case that the most damaged
areas were those highlighted by this method [32–34].
1.5. Miscellaneous ultrasonic techniques
Nonlinear ultrasonic and acousto-ultrasonics are emerging
techniques that have shown some promise for creep damage
assessment. Nonlinear methods such as acousto-elasticity,
harmonics generation, non-collinear mixing, etc., are very
sensitive to increasing dislocation density and other subtle
lattice imperfections that might remain hidden from the above
discussed conventional linear ultrasonic methods. For
example Baby et al. [35] used second harmonics generation
to evaluate creep damage in IMI 834 titanium alloy and found
good agreement between the measured nonlinearity
RT
parameter and the data obtained from metallographic studies.
2. MAGNETIC METHODS
IJE
The application of magnetic NDE techniques is obviously
restricted to ferromagnetic materials and to those cases where
ferromagnetic phases are present within a non-ferromagnetic
material, although in the latter case the resulting wild
variations in permeability with position render the inspection
particularly difficult.
2.1. Magnetic properties
Inspection methods based on variations in magnetic
properties have attracted the attention of many researchers.
While these techniques have sometimes been hailed as more
promising than those based on ultrasound, doubts persist on
their selectivity, since factors including cold work, localized
differences in the composition of the alloy, and the presence
of residual stresses can cause changes in magnetic properties
[36, 37] to a larger extent than they affect the propagation of
ultrasonic waves.
In a study on austenitic stainless steel 304, it was observed
that magnetic phases formed at grain boundaries in a
specimen
subjected to thermal aging at 650 1C, and also in grains
themselves in a specimen crept to rupture at the same
temperature. Since these magnetic phases can be found at an
early stage, changes in the magnetic properties may be used
to
detect creep damage before cavities or microcracks start
developing [38]. In ferritic or martensitic steels, however,
these small changes would be hidden by the strong point-to-
point permeability variations observed even from intact
IJERTV3IS110800
(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 3 Issue 11, November-2014
specimens. A strong measure of agreement has been found on
the behaviour of the remanence in Cr–Mo steels: the
observed
decrease with creep life is due to the demagnetization caused
by the presence of cavities in low-alloy (pearlite) steels such
as 0.5Cr-0.5Mo-0.25V, 1.25Cr-0.5Mo and 2.25Cr-1Mo
[36,37,39,40] and by the precipitation of non-magnetic
carbides in the martensitic 9Cr-1Mo steel [41]. However, the
measurements generally present a very large scatter.
2.2. Barkhausen emission
A study on service-exposed 13-CrMoV-44 steel [42] reported
that the maximum value of Barkhausen emission as a
function of creep life increased initially and then decreased,
while the magnetic field at which this maximum was attained
decreased and then increased correspondingly. This
behaviour was ascribed to the initial coarsening of grains and
precipitates followed by the formation of cavities which
restrict the movement of magnetic domain walls.
An opposite trend was found in a study on modified 9Cr-1Mo
steel (with added Nb and V) [43], where the decrease of the
average amplitude of the Barkhausen signal during the
primary stage of creep and its increase in the secondary and
tertiary stages were attributed to the precipitation and later
coarsening of carbides, i.e. to the same mechanism used by
the same authors to explain the variations in coercivity.
Indeed, a clear relationship between coercivity and magnetic
Barkhausen signal has been observed on ferritic stainless
steel subjected to plastic deformation in tensile tests at room
temperature [44].
2.3. Magneto-acoustic emission
It was long believed that signals could also be generated by
the creation or annihilation of domains [45], but evidence to
the contrary has recently been reported [46]. An important
difference with the Barkhausen emission technique is that
MAE signals can be detected from the bulk of the material,
the maximum measurement depth being determined by the
penetration of the excitation field. It should be observed that
the results of both MAE and Barkhausen emission are not
repeatable because it is not possible to bring the magnetic
domains back to exactly the same state as before the
inspection.
3. HARDNESS
Measurements of Vickers hardness have been considered
in many studies on creep damage, usually in addition to other
techniques. The microstructural changes associated with
thermal aging or creep have a different effect on different
materials: on Cr–Mo steels an approximately linear decrease
in hardness was observed between 20% and 90% of creep
life, followed by a dramatic drop at rupture, as shown in Fig.
9 [33, 47, 48-50], whereas in austenitic steels hardness was
found to increase, especially in the second half of creep life
[51, 52]. In almost all cases, thermal aging in the absence of
mechanical loads was found to have similar but less
pronounced effects. In creep tests on Cr–Mo steels it has been
observed that hardness starts decreasing at smaller values of
the Larson–Miller parameter for loads higher than about 100
MPa [53–55] and that the value of Vickers hardness at
rupture is lower for those specimens tested at lower stress
levels [56].
www.ijert.org 1149

Given the very good correlation between Vickers hardness
and creep life, it is worth asking why this has not been
adopted as the main technique for the assessment of creep
damage. The main reason is that hardness measurements in
industrial environments can often be affected by large errors
[57] and that the presence of a thin soft surface layer,
generally produced by decarburization during steelmaking
heat treatment, can produce highly misleading results unless
the surface is prepared by material removal [58]. Another
possible reason is the high sensitivity of this technique to
local microstructural variations, which results in large scatter
and poor reproducibility, especially if the load applied to the
indenter for the measurement is low [59]. Large point-to-
point variations within the same specimen are of particular
concern when monitoring welds because the HAZ, where
most failures occur, is often very narrow and exhibits
relatively low values of hardness before creep starts [33] and
its local properties can vary wildly depending on the details
of the weld process [6].
4. EDDY CURRENT
Eddy currents depend on a variety of factors, such as
microstructure, hardness, local permeability variations or
differences in chemical composition; it is therefore difficult
to distinguish between changes in the signal due to creep
damage and those deriving from other sources.
A recent paper [60], proposes a novel eddy current
technique, to be applied on austenitic chrome steel boiler
RT
tubes. This technique exploits the formation of a magnetic
oxide scale on the outer surface of the tubes and of a
magnetic ferrite phase in the underlying base metal, whose
IJE
concentrations have been found to be proportional to creep
damage.
In a previous published paper [61], eddy current imaging has
been used to identify areas of significant variation in apparent
eddy current conductivity in a Ni-based super alloy turbine
bucket after service; a strong increase in the absolute
thermoelectric power coefficient was also measured in the
same areas, thus indicating probable creep damage. However,
the results of these tests need to be correlated with the
microstructural changes due to creep; more importantly, this
increase in apparent eddy current conductivity seems to be a
peculiarity of Ni-based alloys.
5. POTENTIAL DROP TECHNIQUES
Potential drop methods have been commonly used for
monitoring creep crack growth by the measurements of
electrical resistance. [62-63]. Under creep load conditions,
electrical resistivity varies because of microstructural changes
such as the precipitation of carbides, the decrease of solute
elements within the matrix, and the changes in density and
size of distributed defects such as voids or cracks [56, 64].
The behaviour of electrical resistivity depends on the material
and on the loading conditions: in creep crack growth
monitoring applications, four different trends of the potential
drop as a function of test time have been identified [63].
IJERTV3IS110800
(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 3 Issue 11, November-2014
6. REPLICATION
Replica metallography is the most commonly used method
for
creep damage detection. Its application to the study of this
type of damage was pioneered in the early 1980s [65]. The
surface to be inspected must be prepared by careful polishing
and etching; a film is then applied to it, softened with an
appropriate solvent and left to solidify. A mirror image of the
tested surface is thus created on the film, which is then
removed, mounted on a stable support and examined under a
microscope – usually with high magnification – to identify
flaws such as voids and microcracks. This technique can
provide quantitative data on the defects, and voids of 1 mm or
less can be easily distinguished on the replicas in laboratory
conditions [66].
7. X RAY DIFFRACTION
The best method of measurement of local strain is based on
use of X-ray diffraction (XRD). The peak diffraction
direction is detected by the absolute elastic strain of the
material under observation. We also get some information on
the plastic deformation and strain in the material as a
byproduct. There are only two ways to avoid this limitation
of XRD, namely either by increasing the incident beam
intensity or by reducing the wave length. X-ray diffraction
methods were successfully used in nickelbase superalloy
turbine blades to assess creep damage. This technique is very
sensitive to defects as small as a few nm and can give
quantitative information on the size, distribution and
morphology of precipitates and voids, which can in turn be
used as indicators of creep damage.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The non-destructive testing method widely used in the power
plant steel for the detection of creep damage is ultrasonic.
The sensitivity of ultrasonic tests are improved and capable
of detecting cracks in regular bodies by using the different
frequency probes depending upon the thickness and other
properties of the material under observation. This method is
portable and used in industries for the detection of creep and
fatigue cracks.
Almost most of the nondestructive techniques studied in this
review face some particular common problems namely:
 The changes due to creep in its early stages have only a
small effect on the measurements because other factors
such as stress concentrations and material
inhomogeneities like defects dominate the recorded data
of the material.
 In the advanced stages, most of these methods can be
used for the detection of creep over the complete
volume, but most of them fail to detect the localized
creep which is the major cause of failure in the materials.
The main conclusions of this review can be summed up as
follows:
 Ultrasonic testing are affected by material property in the
primary stage but gives appreciable results after the
formation and propagation of microcracks. Methods
based on the velocity of waves have been used for better
results in the detection of creep throughout the volume.
www.ijert.org 1150

 Measurements of magnetic properties of the
ferromagnetic materials are affected by many factors,
mainly large point variations in permeability can be seen
in ferritic steels and thus the application of such
nondestructive testing methods is uncertain.
 There are instances where potential drop technique is
certainly able to detect creep damage at primary stages as
compared to other NDT conventional methods who fail
to do so.
The overall results of this review work recommends that
much more research is required in this field and the most
favorable techniques, onto which most future research should
focus are ultrasonic testing, magnetic testing and potential
drop tests for the detection of creep damage throughout the
volume and backscatter techniques and acoustic emission for
creep that are localized at some critical points where the
microcracks originates and further propagate to form cracks
that ultimately cause failures.
Moreover, because of the complicated nature of creep
mechanism and the changes at the microstructural level in the
primary stages, there should be a set guidelines for the
detection of creep that comprises of NDT techniques to be
employed in various stages according to the various variables
like temperature and material properties. This method would
provide explicit results of the range of creep and fatigue
damage. Alongside many changes in the material properties
RT
are the culmination of high temperature applications over a
long span of time and not just because of the mechanical
loads therefore future research should focus mainly on the
thermal aspect for better interpretation of creep mechanism.
IJE
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author would like to thank the Department of Material
Science and Metallurgical Engineering and Chemical
Engineering for the continuous support. The author would
also thanks Sudheer Mathuriya and Supriya Shilpi for their
efforts in the review paper.
REFERENCES
[1] V. Lupinc, J. Bressers (Ed.), Creep and fatigue in high temperature
alloys, Applied Science Publishers, London (1981), pp. 7–40.
[2] R. Lagneborg, J. Bressers (Ed.), Creep and fatigue in high temperature
alloys, Applied Science Publishers, London (1981), pp. 41–71.
[3] J. Dobrzański, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 157–158
(2004), pp. 297–303.
[4] B. Neubauer, U. Wedel, Advances in life prediction methods ASME,
New York (1983) pp. 307–313.
[5] V. Sklenička, K. Kuchařová, M. Svoboda, L. Kloc, J. Buršík, A.
Kroupa, Materials Characterization, 51 (2003), pp. 35–48.
[6] Gooch DJ. In: Comprehensive structural integrity (ed. I. Milne et al.),
vol. 5: Creep and high-temperature failure (ed. A. Saxena). Amsterdam:
Elsevier; 2003. p. 309–359.
[7] H.J. Schüller, L. Hagn, A. Woitscheck, Maschinenschaden, 47 (1974),
pp. 1–13.
[8] J.D. Parker, G.C. Stratford, International Journal of Pressure Vessel and
Piping, 68 (1996), pp. 135–143.
[9] T. Watanabe, M. Tabuchi, M. Yamazaki, H. Hongo, T. Tanabe,
International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 83 (2006), pp.
63–71.
IJERTV3IS110800 www.ijert.org
(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 3 Issue 11, November-2014
[10] K. Laha, K.S. Chandravathi, Bhanu Sankara Parameswaran, K. Rao,
S.L. Mannan, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 38 (2007),
pp. 58–68.
[11] R. Viswanathan, J. Stringer, Journal of Engineering Materials and
Technology, 122 (2000), pp. 246–255.
[12] K.G. Sedman, J.C. Thornley, R.M. Griffin, Engineering Failure
Analysis, 4 (2) (1997), pp. 89–98.
[13] J. Budden, International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 75
(1998), pp. 509–519.
[14] F. Ellis, R. Viswanathan, Fitness for service evaluation in petroleum
and fossil plants ASME, New York (1998) pp. 59—76.
[15] J.A. Francis, W. Mazur, H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, Materials Science and
Technology, 22 (12) (2006), pp. 1387–1395.
[16] H. Hongo, M. Tabuchi, Y. Takahashi, Journal of Solid Mechanics and
Materials Engineering, 3 (3) (2009), pp. 464–469.
[17] M.C. Coleman, D.A. Miller, R.A. Stevens, Proceedings of the
international conference on integrity of high temperature welds
Professional Engineering Publishing, London (1998) pp. 169–179.
[18] A. Dhooge, Welding in the World, 41 (3) (1998), pp. 206–219.
[19] U. Stigh, Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 28 (1) (1987), pp. 1–12.
[20] H. Willems, G. Dobmann, Nuclear Engineering and Design, 128 (1)
(1991), pp. 139–149.
[21] Szelążek J, Kowalewski ZL, Mackiewicz S, Deputat J. In: Proceedings
of the 22nd Danubia-Adria symposium on experimental methods in
solid mechanics, 2005, p. 186–187.
[22] B. Raj, V. Moorthy, T. Jayakumar, K. Bhanu Sankara Rao,
International Materials Reviews, 48 (5) (2003), pp. 273–325.
[23] Saniie J, Panda B, Wang T, Nagle DT. In: Proceedings of the 1990
ultrasonics symposium, IEEE, 1990, p. 987–990.
[24] T. Gómez Alvarez-Arenas, E. Riera-Franco de Sarabia, J.A. Gallego-
Juárez, Ultrasonics, 31 (3) (1993), pp. 155–159.
[25] B. Raj, B.K. Choudhary, R.K. Singh Raman, International Journal of
Pressure Vessels and Piping, 81 (2004), pp. 521–534.
[26] Morishita T, Hirao M, Fukuoka H. Journal of the Society of Materials
Science (Japan) 1990;39:1037–42.
[27] Z.L. Kowalewski, S. Mackiewicz, J. Szelążek, Key Engineering
Materials, 340–341 (2007), pp. 229–234.
[28] H. Stamm, European Journal of Nondestructive Testing, 1 (4) (1992),
pp. 169–178.
[29] J.D. Parker, A.V. Thomas, Proceedings of 5th international conference
on creep and fracture of engineering materials and structuresInstitute of
Materials, London (1993) pp. 671–680.
[30] Ohtani T, Ogi H, HiraoM. In: Proceedings of the 16th WCNDT,
Montreal, 2004.
[31] T. Ohtani, H. Ogi, M. Hirao, Journal of Applied Physics, 45 (5B)
(2006), pp. 4526–4533.
[32] Hatanaka H, Ido N, Takuya I, Uemichi R, Tagami M, Nakagawa H.
Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 2007;129:713–8.
[33] Shyu HF, Lock MWB. Insight 1996;38(2):91–5.
[34] Nonaka I, Takuya I, Takemasa F, Saito K, Miyachi Y, Fujita A.
International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 2007;84:88–96.
[35] Baby S, Kowmudi BN, Omprakash CM, Satyanarayana DVV,
Balasubramaniam K, Kumar V. Scripta Materialia 2008(59):818–21.
[36] Chen ZJ, Govindaraju MR, Jiles DC, Biner SB, Sablik MJ. IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics 1994;30(6):4596–8.
[37] Govindaraju MR, Kaminski DA, Devine MK, Biner SB, Jiles DC.
NDT&E International 1997;30(1):11–7.
[38] Nagae Y. Materials Science and Engineering A 2004;387–389:665–9.
[39] Devine MK, Jiles DC. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics
1992;28(5):2465–6.
[40] Mitra A, Chen ZJ, Jiles DC. Review of progress in quantitative
nondestructive evaluation, 14B. New York: Plenum Press; 1995 pp.
1733–1740.
[41] Mitra A, Mohapatra JN, Swaminathan J, Ghosh M, Panda AK, Ghosh
RN. Scripta Materialia 2007;57:813–6.
[42] Willems H, Jayakumar T, Koble T, Theiner W. In: Proceedings of the
2nd annual report on project D4, Cost 501 /II WP 5C, European
Committee on Special Testing, IzfP Saarbrucken, 1990.
1151
 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 3 Issue 11, November-2014

[43] Mitra A, Mohapatra JN, Swaminathan J, Ghosh M, Panda AK, Ghosh

RN. Scripta Materialia 2007;57:813–6.
[44] O’Sullivan D, Cotterell M, Tanner DA, Me´sza´ros I. NDT&E
International 2004;37:489–96.
[45] Guyot M, Cagan V. Journal of Applied Physics 1993;73(10):5348–53.
[46] Augustyniak B, Sablik MJ, Landgraf FJG, Jiles DC, Chmielewski M,
Piotrowski L, et al. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials
2008;320:2530–3.
[47] Kirihara S, Shiga M, Sukekawa M, Yoshioka T, Asano C. Journal of
the Society of Materials Science (Japan) 1984;33:1097–102.
[48] Goldhoff RM, Woodford DA. Testing for prediction of material
performance in structures and components. Philadelphia: ASTM; 1972
pp. 89–106.
[49] Kadoya Y, Goto T. Journal of the Society of Materials Science (Japan)
1987; 36:999–1004. in Japanese.
[50] Mukhopadhyay SK, Roy H, Roy A. International Journal of Pressure
Vessels and Piping 2009;86:246–51.
[51] Kirihara S, Sukekawa M, Shiga M, Yoshioka T, Asano C. Journal of
the Society of Materials Science (Japan) 1984;33:1103–8.
[52] Sukegawa M, Shiga M, Asano C, Tobita Y, Kirihara S. Journal of the
Society of Materials Science (Japan) 1985;34:1478–82.
[53] Mukhopadhyay SK, Roy H, Roy A. International Journal of Pressure
Vessels and Piping 2009;86:246–51.
[54] Goto T. Mitsubishi Technical Bulletin 1985;169.
[55] Batte AD, Gooch DJ. In: Viswanathan R, editor. Life assessment and
improvement of turbogenerator rotors for fossil plants. New York:
Pergamon Press; 1985. p. 3.79–100.
[56] Masuyama F. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping
2006;83:819–25.
[57] Gooch DJ, Strang A, Beech SM. Proceedings of 5th international
conference on creep and fracture of engineering materials and
structures. London: Institute of Materials; 1993 pp. 743 — 763.
RT
[58] Allen DJ, Fenton ST. In: Baltica VII: symposium on life management
and maintenance for power plants, Technical Research Centre of
Finland, Espoo, 2007, pp. 156–170.
IJE

[59] Viswanathan R, Paterson SR, Grunloh H, Gehl S. Journal of Pressure

Vessel Technology 1994;116:1–16.
[60] Augustyniak B, Chmielewski M, Sablik MJ, Augustyniak M, Walker S.
Nondestructive Testing and Evaluation 2009;24(1–2):121–41.
[61] Carreon H. Nondestructive Testing and Evaluation 2009;24(1–2):233–
41.
[62] Fuji A, Kitagawa M, Yokobori AT. Engineering Fracture Mechanics
1993;45(1):39–50.
[63] Dogan B, Nikbin K, Petrovski B, Ceyhan U, Dean DW. International
Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 2006;83:784–97.
[64] Sukekawa M, Shiga M, Tobita Y, Kirihara S. International conference
on creep. Tokyo: JSME; 1986 pp. 321–325.
[65] Neubauer B, Wedel U. Advances in life prediction methods. New
York: ASME; 1983 pp. 307–313.
[66] Loh NL. British Journal of NDT 1989;31(8):437–9.

 

IJERTV3IS110800 www.ijert.org 1152

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)