Abstract
Creep-fatigue crack formation (endurance) and crack growth rate data are necessary inputs for assessing the structural integrity and for estimating the design life of high temperature components in power generation and aircraft engine industries. Ensuring consistency in the reported test data, as well as an understanding of the inherent scatter and its source in the data, are both necessary for assuring quality and limitations of the analyses that rely on the data. In 2008, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) under the umbrella of its subcommittees E08.05 on Cyclic Deformation and Crack Formation and E08.06 on Crack Growth, and the sponsorship of Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) through its international experts’ working group on creep-fatigue embarked on the task of developing separate standard test methods for creep-fatigue crack formation and creep-fatigue crack growth. The first standard entitled, “E-2714-09: Standard Test Method for Creep-fatigue Testing” was developed in 2009 and was followed up with a round-robin consisting of 13 laboratories around the world for testing the newly developed standard. This paper discusses the results of this round-robin concluded in 2012 using the widely used P91 steel that led to the formulation of the Precision and Bias statement contained in the version of the ASTM standard E2714 that was successfully balloted in the year 2013.
