1-20 of 312 Search Results for

cavitation test

Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account

Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Close Modal
Sort by
Image
Published: 01 October 2014
Fig. 14 Cavitation test results for treated vs. nontreated 316 stainless steel. Cavitation testing was performed in liquid mercury as the dense liquid medium, using a vibratory horn. Eight-fold reduction in weight loss for treated vs. nontreated specimens is shown. Source: Ref 2 More
Image
Published: 01 January 2003
Fig. 1 Schematic of a typical vibratory erosion/cavitation test apparatus. Source: Ref 4 More
Image
Published: 01 January 2003
Fig. 2 Examples of rotating disk and rotating arm erosion/cavitation test apparatuses. (a) Small, relatively low-speed rotating disk and jet apparatus. (b) Large, high-speed rotating arm spray apparatus. Source: Ref 5 More
Image
Published: 01 January 2002
Fig. 3 Wear surface of Al 2 O 3 after vibratory cavitation test. Courtesy of CETIM More
Image
Published: 01 January 2002
Fig. 5 Wear surface of 304 stainless steel after vibratory cavitation test. Courtesy of CETIM More
Image
Published: 01 January 2002
Fig. 22 Schematic of a typical vibratory erosion/cavitation test apparatus. Source: Ref 54 More
Image
Published: 01 January 2002
Fig. 23 Examples of rotating disk and rotating arm erosion: cavitation test apparatuses. (a) Small, relatively low-speed rotating disk and jet apparatus. (b) Large, high-speed rotating arm spray apparatus. Source: Ref 55 More
Image
Published: 31 December 2017
Fig. 28 Vibratory cavitation erosion test (ASTM G32) results to relate cobalt-base wrought alloys with comparable alloys. Test parameters: test temperature, 16 °C (61 °F); test medium, distilled water; frequency, 20 kHz; amplitude, 0.05 mm (0.002 in.). All samples were solution annealed More
Image
Published: 01 January 2002
Fig. 4 Cavitation erosion: incubation stage of Ti-6Al-4V on vibratory cavitation test. Courtesy of CETIM More
Series: ASM Handbook Archive
Volume: 11
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 January 2002
DOI: 10.31399/asm.hb.v11.a0003569
EISBN: 978-1-62708-180-1
..., and gearboxes. It provides information on the cavitation resistance of materials and other prevention parameters. The article describes two American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards for the evaluation of erosion and cavitation, namely, ASTM Standard G 32 and ASTM Standard G 73. It concludes...
Series: ASM Handbook
Volume: 13A
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 January 2003
DOI: 10.31399/asm.hb.v13a.a0003669
EISBN: 978-1-62708-182-5
... Abstract Erosion, cavitation, and impingement are mechanically assisted forms of material degradation that often contribute to corrosive wear. This article identifies and describes several tests that are useful for ranking the service potential of candidate materials under such conditions...
Image
Published: 01 August 2013
Fig. 31 Schematic diagram of cavitation jet testing apparatus. Source: Ref 32 More
Series: ASM Handbook
Volume: 18
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 31 December 2017
DOI: 10.31399/asm.hb.v18.a0006384
EISBN: 978-1-62708-192-4
... spherical bubbles when collapsing ( Ref 24 , 25 , 26 ). Laboratory Testing Methods Several types of laboratory devices have been developed to evaluate the resistance to cavitation erosion of materials such as rotating disks, vibratory devices, cavitating liquid jets, and high-speed cavitation...
Image
Published: 15 January 2021
erosion tester. Source: Ref 28 . Reproduced with permission from “Standard Test Method for Conducting Erosion Tests by Solid Particle Impingement Using Gas Jets,” G 76, Corrosion of Metals; Wear and Erosion , Vol 03.02, Annual Book of ASTM Standards , ASTM International, 2019. (d) Cavitation-corrosion More
Image
Published: 31 December 2017
Fig. 15 Mass loss curves for three different metallic alloys: aluminum alloy 7075, nickel-aluminum-bronze alloy C95400, and duplex stainless steel A2205. Mass loss tests were conducted in the LEGI cavitation erosion tunnel (see Fig. 9 ). Upstream pressure 40 bar, cavitation number 0.9 More
Image
Published: 01 January 1987
Fig. 1 Grain-boundary cavitation in iron. This is the mechanism by which metals typically fail when subjected to elevated temperatures and low strain rates. Composition, in parts per million: 70 C, 60 S, 54 O, 11 N, 40 P. Rod, 13 mm (0.5 in.) in diameter, was made by vacuum induction melting More
Image
Published: 31 December 2017
Fig. 12 Typical histograms of pitting rate. Material is stainless steel A2205. The specimen was eroded in the LEGI cavitation erosion tunnel. Pitting test results for two different operating conditions corresponding to two different values of the upstream pressure are shown (10 and 20 bar More
Series: ASM Handbook
Volume: 22A
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 December 2009
DOI: 10.31399/asm.hb.v22a.a0005421
EISBN: 978-1-62708-196-2
... under uniaxial versus multiaxial tensile-stress conditions. Mesoscale models incorporate the influence of local microstructure and texture on cavitation. The article outlines the descriptions of cavity coalescence and shrinkage. It also describes the simulation of the tension test to predict tensile...
Series: ASM Handbook Archive
Volume: 11
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 January 2002
DOI: 10.31399/asm.hb.v11.a0003570
EISBN: 978-1-62708-180-1
.... , “Cyclic Plastic Strain Energy and the Fatigue of Metals,” STP 378, Internal Friction, Damping, and Cyclic Plasticity , ASTM , 1965 , p 45 – 84 11. “Standard Method of Vibratory Cavitation Erosion Test,” G 32, Annual Book of ASTM Standards , ASTM 12. Feltner C.E. and Beardmore...
Image
Published: 31 December 2017
Fig. 18 Microhardness profiles in eroded samples for three different metallic alloys: aluminum alloy 7075, nickel-aluminum-bronze alloy C95400, and duplex stainless steel A2205. Mass loss tests were conducted in the LEGI cavitation erosion tunnel ( Fig. 9 ). Upstream pressure 40 bar More