Search Results for applied stress

Fig. 6 X-ray diffraction stress versus applied stress for varying average roughness ( R a ). (a) Samples with R a of 1, 3, and 6 μm. (b) Samples with R a of 1, 40, and 56 μm. (Source: Ref 26 ) More

Fig. 7 Ratio of measured stress and applied stress for varying R a . Source: Ref 26 More

Fig. 9 X-ray diffraction stress versus applied stress on (a) as-received and (b) electropolished surfaces More

Fig. 22 Time to stress-corrosion cracking failure versus applied stress More

Fig. 6 X-ray diffraction (XRD) stress versus applied stress for varying average roughness ( R a ). (a) Samples with R a of 1, 3, and 6 μm. (b) Samples with R a of 1, 40, and 56 μm. Source: Ref 35 More

Fig. 7 Ratio of measured stress (XRD, x-ray diffraction) and applied stress for varying average roughness, R a . Source: Ref 35 More

Fig. 9 X-ray diffraction stress versus applied stress on (a) as-received and (b) electropolished surfaces More

Fig. 22 J c normalized to zero applied stress as a function of stress, σ, at indicated fields for Cu-Nb-Sn, Cu-V-Ga in situ composites, and a conventional commercial V 3 Ga composite. Source: Ref 34 More

Fig. 14 Crack-tip stress intensity ( K I ) in terms of applied stress (σ) for (a) a center-cracked plate and (b) an edge-cracked plate under uniform tension More

Fig. 4 Crack-tip stress-intensity ( K I ) in terms of applied stress (σ) for (a) a center-cracked plate and (b) an edge-cracked plate under uniform tension. The crack shown in (a) is defined as 2 a and the crack shown in (b) is defined as a, because of the convention that any crack More

Fig. 22 Time to stress-corrosion cracking failure versus applied stress More

Fig. 28 Applied stress versus case depth (net strength). More

Fig. 12 Critical crack depth vs. applied stress for WF14 × 730 H-section, a/c = 0.5, δ m = 0.25 mm (0.010 in.) More

Fig. 42 Variant coalescence of 18R martensite in Cu-Zn-Ga under applied stress. Source: Ref 42 . Reprinted with permission More

Fig. 28 Schematic diagram of time to failure versus applied stress, σ, normalized to the yield strength σ y for stress corrosion More

Fig. 60 Relationship of applied stress and flaw depth to crack propagation in hydrogen gas. Dashed lines show an example of the use of such a chart for a steel with K th of 60.5 MPa m (55 ksi in . at an operating stress of 359 MPa (52 ksi). Source: Ref 159 More

Fig. 7 Hydrogen embrittlement crack growth rate as a function of applied stress intensity for two different hardnesses and environments for an AISI 4340 steel, contoured double-cantilever beam test specimen More

Fig. 12 Response of a four-parameter model to a constant applied stress, where σ 0 is the applied stress and t 0 is the removal time of the applied stress. The solid line represents the four-parameter response; the dotted line, the Voigt-Kelvin element response; the dashed line More

Fig. 11 Applied stress versus life of tensile-type stainless steel specimens in simulated sea water More

Fig. 14 Hydrogen embrittlement crack growth rate as a function of applied stress intensity for two different hardnesses and environments for an AISI 4340 steel contoured double-cantilever beam test specimen More