Master Thesis

Development and Evaluation of a Small Punch

Testing Device

Jan Benjamin Ottosson

Linkping 2010

LIU-IEI-TEK-A10/00870SE

Division of Engineering Materials

Department of Management and Engineering (IEI)
Linkpings universitet, SE-581 83 Linkping, Sweden

Development and Evaluation of a Small Punch

Testing Device

Masters thesis project conducted at

Division of Engineering Materials
Linkpings universitet
by
Jan Benjamin Ottosson
LIU-IEI-TEK-A10/00870SE

Supervisor and Examiner:

Hkan Brodin

Linkping, 10 June, 2010

Avdelning, Institution
Division, Department

Datum
Date

Department of Management and Engineering

Division of Engineering Materials
Linkpings universitet
S-581 83 Linkping, Sweden
Sprk
Language

Rapporttyp
Report category

ISBN

 Svenska/Swedish

 Licentiatavhandling

ISRN

 Engelska/English



 Examensarbete
 C-uppsats
 D-uppsats

 vrig rapport

2010-006-10

LIU-IEI-TEK-A10/00870SE
Serietitel och serienummer ISSN
Title of series, numbering


URL fr elektronisk version

Titel
Title

Development and Evaluation of a Small Punch Testing Device

Frfattare Jan Benjamin Ottosson

Author

Sammanfattning
Abstract
In the turbine industry today, thermal barrier coatings are a commonly used, these
are 0.1-2mm thick. So to be able to do some type of mechanical testing to receive
material data so one can build an opinion regarding the health of the material. One
needs a procedure that can work with small specimens and achieve clear results
that can be transformed and compared with known data and known procedures.
One of those methods is Small Punch Testing.
This thesis describes one way to develop and test a functioning prototype of a
Small Punch Testing device. The thesis includes; the reason it was developed in
the beginning and how it has been developed throughout the decades, also in which
areas the main research is made. It also shortly describes a working procedure in
Ansys to get a Finite Element Method [FEM] model working.
This method showed itself as useful, when just a small sample is at hand. The
trials in this thesis also show that repetitive test can be done with good results
which can be compared with real and FEM analysis data such as uts .
Inom turbin industrin idag s r keramiska vrme barrirer vanligt frekommande dessa r normalt 0,1-2mm tjocka. Fr att kunna utfra mekanisk provning
som grund fr att bilda en sikt om materialets kondition. S behver man en
metod som kan stadkomma tydliga data med sm provbitar, Small Punch Testing r en av dem.
Den hr rapporten beskriver hur man kan g tillvga fr att f en fungerande
prototyp. Den tar upp metodens ursprung och hur den har utvecklats under r
tiondena, ocks mot vad den nuvarande forskningen riktar sig. Den beskriver ven
kort hur man stller upp en finita element metod [FEM] modell i Ansys.
Metoden visade sig anvndbar nr man bara har en liten provbit att tillg.
Frsken visade att repetitiva tester kan gras med bra resultat som gr att jmfra med verkliga och FEM analys data.

Nyckelord
Keywords
Small Punch, Ansys, Ultimate Tensile Strenght

Abstract
In the turbine industry today, thermal barrier coatings are a commonly used, these
are 0.1-2mm thick. So to be able to do some type of mechanical testing to receive
material data so one can build an opinion regarding the health of the material. One
needs a procedure that can work with small specimens and achieve clear results
that can be transformed and compared with known data and known procedures.
One of those methods is Small Punch Testing.
This thesis describes one way to develop and test a functioning prototype of a
Small Punch Testing device. The thesis includes; the reason it was developed in
the beginning and how it has been developed throughout the decades, also in which
areas the main research is made. It also shortly describes a working procedure in
Ansys to get a Finite Element Method [FEM] model working.
This method showed itself as useful, when just a small sample is at hand. The
trials in this thesis also show that repetitive test can be done with good results
which can be compared with real and FEM analysis data such as uts .

Inom turbin industrin idag s r keramiska vrme barrirer vanligt frekommande dessa r normalt 0,1-2mm tjocka. Fr att kunna utfra mekanisk provning
som grund fr att bilda en sikt om materialets kondition. S behver man en
metod som kan stadkomma tydliga data med sm provbitar, Small Punch Testing
r en av dem.
Den hr rapporten beskriver hur man kan g tillvga fr att f en fungerande
prototyp. Den tar upp metodens ursprung och hur den har utvecklats under r
tiondena, ocks mot vad den nuvarande forskningen riktar sig. Den beskriver ven
kort hur man stller upp en finita element metod [FEM] modell i Ansys.
Metoden visade sig anvndbar nr man bara har en liten provbit att tillg.
Frsken visade att repetitiva tester kan gras med bra resultat som gr att jmfra med verkliga och FEM analys data.

Acknowledgements
This master thesis is made as a final project in the programme for a Master of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering, at the Division of Engineering Materials.
I would like to thank my supervisor Hkan Brodin and all the people at the division
for their help and I would also like to thank the workshop staff.
Jan Benjamin Ottosson

vii

Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 Aim and purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3
3
3

2 Method
2.1 Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.1 Analytical method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 Specimen holder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5
5
6
6

3 Results

4 Discussion
4.1 Clamp Force . . . . .
4.2 Performing the test . .
4.3 Possible error sources .
4.3.1 Ansys . . . . .

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

11
16
16
16
17

5 Conclusion

19

A SPT drawings

21

B Ansys
B.1 What to think about when modelling a 3-D modell in Ansys . . . .
B.1.1 Last minute results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25
25
27

Bibliography

29

Contents

Development and Evaluation of a Small Punch

Testing Device
Jan Benjamin Ottosson
June 14, 2010

Contents
Nomenclature and Equations

d = disc diameter [mm ]

t = disc thickness [mm ]
E = E modulus [GPa ]
= tensile strength [MPa ]
 = strain[% ]
uts = ultimate tensile strength [MPa ]
dF = displacement at failure [mm ]
Lu = ultimate load [N ]
Cl = die clearance
D = ball diameter [mm ]
A = lower die diameter [mm ]
A = 1.5
D =1
Equations 1, 2 and has been examined by S.D. Norris and J.D. Parker[1]
Lu
t (2.32D 0.9Cl + 0.56)

(1)

Lu
t (0.14D 0.82Cl + 2.17dF + 0.6)

(2)

uts =
uts =

Cl = A (D + 2t)

Chapter 1

Introduction
The ability of performing material investigations on small specimens is of great
importance, especially when it comes to parts that are or has been in service. Small
punch testing [SPT] has been developed for just that case e.g. to investigate a
pipe in a nuclear reactor that is still in service, this type of testing can be seen as
a non destructive test due to the small specimen size.

1.1

Aim and purpose

The aim of this thesis work is to design and evaluate a SPT device for room
temperature testing and to see to which theory it corresponds, i.e. uniaxial tensile
test [UTT] or other known methods. It was decided to use a device for room
temperature testing to start with because it has not previously been done here at
Linkping University, it can be seen as a pre-study to a high temperature device.
The materials that will be examinined are Al 2524-t3, iron SS1312 and In792,
these materials span from ductile to the not that ductile In792.

1.2

History

This type of technique has been around since the early eighties [2][3], foremost to
study creep in high temperature alloys used in nuclear plants. The first two countries where it started are the USA and Japan. There are two ways to look at SPT
time dependant, for example creep examination at different temperatures than
room temperature and time independent, examination made at room temperature
to examine e.g. uts
Nowadays it is mainly used in two different areas, high temperature alloys and
ultra high molecular weight polyethylene [UHMWPE] in biomaterials [4]. It has it
grounds in that one wants to be able to extract information from small volumes of
material. It can be used for shear force examinations, but in that case one uses a
flat punch instead of the ball that is used to examine uts . In steels one also uses
SPT to find out ductile to brittle transition temperature [DBTT] [5]. They look at
3

Introduction

the difference between Charpy test [CVN] and SPT the conclusion that they did
find was that the SPT results in a much lower transition temperature, the reasons
why is closer discussed in the paper. The technique is applicable where there is a
necessity to examine a product far too small to be able to produce normal sized
test specimen. The thermal barrier coating [TBC] of turbine shovels is a good
example, due to the small thickness of the TBC, 0.1-0.25mm. A common type
of SPT uses transmission electron microscope [TEM] sample sized specimens i.e.
3mm in diameter and between 0.1 and 0.5mm in thickness [6]. This is the SPT
commonly known as small punch test, which shall examined closer. One could
believe that the disc thickness is not of importance, but in [7] they have looked
closer at the influence of disc size and one can see that the deflection stays the
same but the thicker the specimen the more force is needed, which one would
hope to see. In [8] it is mentioned that a aspect ratio, disc diameter/thickness
should be less than 60 otherwise the specimens showed signs of local deformation
and are not acceptable for use, with a aspect ratio over 118 local wrinkling and
plastic instability occurs which is useless when a repeatable result is needed. They
also mention a thickness tolerance of +-0.0013mm but +-0.0051mm is a nominal
acceptable value. Otherwise there is one standardized type with a disc diameter
of 8mm and a thickness of 0.5mm used for metals [9][10] and for UHMWPE a disc
diameter of 6.4mm and a thickness of 0.5mm[11]. The small sample size makes it
compatible with other non destructive tests. It also makes it possible to actually
take a sample to examine from a product in use, which is a big advantage. As far
as it comes to the design of the test equipment that was seen as the best to go for,
has it grounds in two papers [12][13]. But the actual design is made from scratch
with the inner dimensions corresponding to the others.

Chapter 2

Method
2.1

Method

At first a literature study was done, to see what has been done so far, and how
it has been made i.e. history. Are there any standards applicable? Then followed
the actual CAD process to bring forth a working prototype, this took longer than
expected because that it is my first prototype that I have made and I had very little
knowledge in the CAD programme Pro/Engineer 4 before I started. The whole
R II system with a 10kN loading-cell
apparatus will be fitted in a 858 Mini Bionix
which will be more than sufficient to provide accurate test data. To have a more
exact measurement of the deflection an extensometer will be added under the die to
measure directly the specimens deflection without any regards to ball compression
etc. In two of the materials that shall be examined, iron SS 1312 and Al 2524-t3,
there will also be a UTT done to see how the two different methods correspond to
each other. The TEM sized samples will be produced through different methods,
the Al 4010, Al 2524-t3 and SS 1312 will be punched from UTT specimens, In792
discs will be produced through cutting a disc and there after follows grinding to
the correct thickness and from those plates the TEM sized specimen will be cut
with electronic discharge machining [EDM]. All the specimens are grinded with
500 SiC paper and In792 finished off with 1200 SiC paper. When the discs had
been produced the thickness of each was established with a digital dial indicator.
The thickness was decided with three significant numbers. Due to the design of
this device a thickness of maximum 0.25mm is a must. Larger thickness will lead
to something equivalent to deep drawing of aluminium cans, highly undesirable.

Performing the test

The actual test was performed with a speed of 0.15mm/min which results in information about force and deflection during the test. The clamping force for Al
2524-t3 ended up at 750-850N if more was applied the plate was plastically deformed. For SS 1312 and In792 a higher clamp force was applied 1150-1350N.
5

2.1.1

Method

Analytical method

The analytical methods used for comparison is the computer software Ansys Workbench v.12 and equations 1 and 2 derived by S.D. Norris and J.D. Parker for more
informaiton about the equations see [1].
Ansys
A model was created in Ansys Workbench Static Structural which is a modern
FEM software with graphical interface, to have more numerical data to compare
with. When it came to achieve a working model in Ansys, there were a lot of
problems getting it right due to all the constraints working in the model. All
these questions had to be answered before implementing them: friction between
different types of materials acting together? what type of load should be applied?
2-D or 3-D? Which type of mesh gives most relying result in the model? The last
question could actually be answered after the model was working by trial and error.
Some types of mesh gave some really disturbing results for example, deformation
that cannot occur. Due to the complexity of the model friction coefficients had
to be decided for each contact surface Cambridge Engineering Selector[14] was
used in combination with [15] to establish them. Two types of elements tetragonal
and quad was tried, also different mesh concentrations, from 4500 up to 6500.
The difference in deflection is 0.6% which for my application is negligible and in
the stresses measured according to von-Mises the difference was 2% which also
is negligible. So the simulations are run with the lower mesh with quad mesh,
to lower the time needed to do the calculations. The model used in this case is
in 3-D to make it simpler to understand. The mesh used is in Ansys referred to
as SOLD186, quad with 20 nodes. In Appendix B deeper information about the
procedures in Ansys can be found.

2.2

Specimen holder

The first thing done was a literature study to find information, if there was a
standard, if not which dimensions where most commonly used for the TEM sized
specimens. Drawings were not found but applicable dimensions, but then there
was the shape, outer size and function to determine. At this stage consultaions
was made, with different persons working at the university and my supervisor and
discussed different prototypes and concluded that according to this principle that
the current prototype is built by is the most probable to succeed. Another obstacle
encountered was how narrow should the different dimensions be, especially the
specimen clamper with its small diameter hole and the area under the sample with
a radius of 0.2mm to prevent shearing to occur. The material for the device was
R 4
also to be determined and after many different propositions Uddeholm Vanadis
Extra was chosen for the critical parts(A.1., A.3.) due to its good properties, high
wear resistance and high ductility which leads to high resistance against adhesive
wearing and chipping. Through hardening, a hardness up to 66 HRC is achievable,
which is in our application desirable. For the non critical parts steel will be used.

2.2 Specimen holder

Besides that the force will be measured as well as the deflection. To be able to
do this a holder for the SPT device had to be made. Here some problem due to
R II was encountered. To hold
the physical limitations of the 858 Mini Bionix
the specimens under clamp force. It was designed so that disc springs can be
used to apply a different clamp force if it becomes necessary to change between
different materials, which is most likely to be done between aluminium and In792.
To be able to screw it together some type of grip had to be implemented, milling
machines have a similar shape as the prototype has. So specifications for how
C-Spanners work was included into the design. As punch Cr-steel balls with a
hardness of 60/66HRC will be used and as ball pusher a rod of 99.7% Al2O3 will
be used all this to minimize malfunction and interference during testing.

Figure 2.1. Device setup

Figure 2.1 shows the device setup in the machine, showing the black load cell
and with its puncher.

Method

Chapter 3

Results
With the designed small punch testing equipment repetitive tests have been made
and they show consistency which is a requirement to be able to draw conclusions
from the received data. When the data for the different materials was obtained, an
average was calculated too and that value was compared withdata and the result
from Ansys.
An example is shown in Figure 3.1 which represents a typical curve.

Figure 3.1. A typicall Load/Displacement curve

There is a concave part of the Load Displacement curve that can be derived
from the fact that the plate receives a larger contact area with the ball and at the
same time undergoes work hardening.
This shape of curve makes it more or less impossible to be able, by any means,
to receive a yield stress so the focus has been set on uts . To calculate uts for
Al2524-t3 and SS1312 Equation 1 has been used and Equation 2 for In792.
9

10

Results
Table 3.1. Test data

Material
2524-t3
SS 1312
In 792

Calulated uts
312
320
1320

Ansys uts
528
666
1274

Handbook uts
405-450
360-460

UTT uts
515
320
845

These are the data recived from tests with the other data available on the
examined materials. The handbook gives a span for uts , the UTT for my specific
materials are also represented.

Figure 3.2. Curves for the three examined materials

As seen above the SPT results in to similar curves for the tested materials.

Chapter 4

Discussion

The calculated uts for In792 is really close to the value from Ansys.
The Al 2524-t3 shows good correlation between the Ansys result and the UTT,
but a significant difference to the calculatded value.
For SS 1312 the calculated uts and the UTT it is a perfect match but between
Ansys and UTT the value received from Ansys is more than twice as high as for
the other values.
As stated in [7] equation 1 and 2 are a good point of origin to find a more specific
equation for the material that one is conducting research on at the moment, the
need to do that can easily be deduced from the analyzed data. If there had
been more consistency between the materials it would have been better. Of three
different pairing options all three were hit but this probably lies in the fact that
three very different types of materials was chosen, this to induce variating results
which was received. The method is not perfect but when properly used a really
good option.
11

12

Discussion

Figure 4.1. Whole curve with rupture

Figure 4.2. UTT 2524-t3

In Figure 4.1 the plastic deformation and the rupture is clearly seen but the
where exactly does the transition from elastic deformation to plastic deformation
occur?. Figure 4.2 shows a UTT 2524-t3 test for comparison with a familiar data
type. With the three known steps, elastic deformation, plastic deformation and
rupture of the material. Nevertheless, the curve in Figure 4.1 is really interesting,
one should have in mind that this method affects the material in biaxial directions,
not uniaxial which is the most used procedure. As seen in 3.2, this type of curve
was seen in all the materials but the knee became less noticeable with increasing
thickness. When the UTT values in Table 3.1 and the graphs in Figure 3.2 are

13
compared, they correlate good between each other. SS1312 with the lowest value
also has the lowest value in the graph which further supports the theory that this
method gives repeatable and reliable results. The graphs curvature supports previous work done in the field which also supports the statement of a working device.
In Figure 4.3 and Figure 4.4 fractures are shown for the different materials. As
expected the crack propagation seem to have started at the top where the stresses
according to Ansys are highest Figure 4.5.

Figure 4.3. Fracture In792

14

Discussion

Figure 4.4. Fracture Al 2524-t3

Figure 4.5. Typicall stress distribution under force

15
As seen in Figure 4.6 the stresses are spread out throughout the top of the
specimen which in reallity transforms into the microcracks seen in Figure 4.7.

Figure 4.6. Typicall stress distribution under force from beneath

Figure 4.7. Micro cracks in In792

16

Discussion
Table 4.1. Serie 2524-t3

uts
Average

309
310

322

294

313

318

301

311

In Table 4.1 ultimate strenght is shown for AL 2524-t3, it is to be seen that

the average value has a deviation of +4% and -5% which can be seen as good
consistency regarding all unknown parameters that was declared at the beginning.

4.1

Clamp Force

The clamping force in this case was there to prevent slipping of the disc, so it
can be seen as clamped disc. It is also corresponds to how the test are commonly
performed. The actuall affect of the clamping brings some questions. As stated
previously large plastic deformation was observed when to high force was applied,
was the estamination of how much the force must be reduced correct? or did it
still affect the material, but not at a macro level but at micro level and there
for not visible. They clamping force should there for be weak enough to leave no
irreversible deformation but strong enough to prevent slipping. Equation 1 and
2 do not take clamp force into regard, thus they are empiricall so they build on
experiments with know boundary conditions, so with similar conditions it should
work. The fact that the method is a plate with clamped edge can bring in the
question if [16] can be used, that is plate bending theory. The handbook shows two
different scenarios, plate with clamped edges and freely supported plate, and in
SPT the scenario is a mixture of the two based on the fact that a radius of 0.2mm
has been implemented to prevent shearing that can occur. In the beginning it was
regarded as one solution but later on as more informatio came forth that idea was
discarde.

4.2

Performing the test

The velocity of 0.15mm/min was set at the beginning of the trails but higher
velocities where also tried but they caused immediate failure of the ceramic staff,
so the speed was kept at 0.15mm/min. One solution to prevent it from happening
could have been to use a staff consisting of a harder ceramic.

4.3

Possible error sources

As possible error sources, some type of micro work hardening due to grinding. For
the Al 2524-t3 and SS 1312, surface roughness may play a part, only being grinded
with 500 SiC paper not 1200 as with In792. Was the friction between ball and
disc always the same. Was the clamping force exactly the same?

4.3 Possible error sources

4.3.1

17

Ansys

In Ansys some obvious error sources are the defined parameters as friction coefficients, clamp force, the fact that it is not a transient analasis(it does not use
constant speed), mesh type and size. Most of these are taken into consideration
but there is always room for errors.

18

Discussion

Chapter 5

Conclusion
In this report small punch testing has been examined and discusses different types
of conclusion one can draw from the recieved data. And the results are encouraging
to that point that they are repetitive and shows good consistency.
The general equations used gives a rule of thumb about where the uts will be.
For further analasis a recommendation to perform trials at 0.10, 0.15, 0.20 and
0.25mm thickness should be done with eight specimens of each thickness and
remove the specimens with the highest and lowest value. This to minimize the
affect of anomalies thar can occur during testing.

19

20

Conclusion

Appendix A

SPT drawings

21

22

SPT drawings

ndr nr

Godknd av-datum

ndringens art/ndringsmeddelande

SECTION A-A

1.5+0.1

R4

6.3
6.850.5
0.2x45

40.5

R0.2

3.2-0.05

1-0.1

300.5

21.5-0.1

370.5

21+0.5

M52x1.5

Pos nr

Antal

Konstruerad av

gare

IEI

1x45
SECTION B-B

Titel/Benmning, beteckning, material, dimension o.d.

Granskad av

Linkpings universitet

Generell tolerans
SS-ISO2768-1

Godknd av - datum

Artikel nr/Referens
Generell ytVyplacering
jmnhet, Ra

Skala

Titel/Benmning

Ritningsnummer

Utgva

Blad

23

Godknd av-datum

70.001

15.000.5

M52.00x1.5

R4

6.30

1x45

8.000.5

21.000.5

4.000.5

SECTION A-A

35.001

ndringens art/ndringsmeddelande

20.00-0.5

ndr nr

1x45
1x45
1x45
SECTION B-B
10.85
1.000.5

Pos nr

Antal

Konstruerad av

gare

IEI

Titel/Benmning, beteckning, material, dimension o.d.

Granskad av

Generell tolerans
SS-ISO2768-1

Godknd av - datum

Artikel nr/Referens
Generell ytVyplacering
jmnhet, Ra

Skala

Titel/Benmning

Ritningsnummer

Linkpings universitet

Figure A.1. A.2 Die top

Utgva

Blad

24

SPT drawings

ndr nr

Godknd av-datum

ndringens art/ndringsmeddelande

21+0.1

190.5

150.5

80.2

1+0.1

SECTION C-C

1.050.01

1x45

3.1+0.05

SECTION A-A

Pos nr

Titel/Benmning, beteckning, material, dimension o.d.

Antal

Granskad av

Konstruerad av

gare

IEI

Generell tolerans
SS-ISO2768-1

Godknd av - datum

Artikel nr/Referens
Generell ytVyplacering
jmnhet, Ra

Skala

Titel/Benmning

Ritningsnummer

Linkpings universitet

Figure A.2. A.3 Specimen clamper

Utgva

Blad

Appendix B

Ansys
B.1

What to think about when modelling a 3-D

modell in Ansys

In this thesis Ansys Workbench v. 12 Static Structural was used. The problems
do not only lie in the choosing of mesh, in my case that was the easy part. The
real problem was to find what specific commands that has to be turned on when
working with a 3-D non-linear model with large deformation. How to define the
proper connections and constraints. Here follows a short list with the most critical
settings in my modell.
In Commands file;
CNCHECK, AUTO
In the outline tree
Behaviour: Asymmetric
Formulation: Augmented Lagrange
Normal Stiffness: Manual
Normal Stiffness Factor: between 0.01-0.04
Large Deflection: ON
Weak Springs: Program Controlled
In Solutions be careful for what you want, think twice when defining in Scope
which bodies/surfaces one want to receive data from, most probably not the whole
system.

25

26

Ansys

For the analasis made, some material parameters had to be stated in Ansys
and a non-linear model was uses and then Ansys need the following data.
Density
Youngs Modulus
Poissons Ration
Yield Strenght
Tangent Modulus

Figure B.1. Defined modell in Ansys

Figure B.1 shows how the applied forces and limitations was applied. The only
thing changing between the test was the material of the disc in this model. This
was done to have so few variables as possible.
The clamping force was set to 2000 N, but using the limitation of displacement, so
the compacting of the disc was limited to maximum 0.015mm. The punch force of
500 N was set on the fact that most of the other tests done in this field has used
a 500 N load cell to perform this type test.

B.1 What to think about when modelling a 3-D modell in Ansys

B.1.1

27

Last minute results

A last minute change was done, this change was to increase the step length so it
corresponds to resluts received in the SPT tests for each material, that is the time
it took for the specimen to reach maximum force.
For the different materials better data was the result, higher accuracy compared
with handbook data was achieved for SS1312 and AL 2524-t3 the new data can
be seen in the table below.
Table B.1. Ansys last minute data

Material
2524-t3
SS 1312
In 792

Ansys uts
339
362
1274

Handbook uts
405-450
360-460
845

But In792 received the same value, so is that because of that it is a more brittle
material or has it some other ground? That is for future tests to decide.

28

Ansys

Bibliography
[1] S. D. Norris and J. D. Parker. Deformation processes during disc bend loading.
Materials Science and Technology, 12:163170(8), February 1996.
[2] Jai-Man Baik, J. Kameda, and O. Buck. Small punch test evaluation of intergranular embrittlement of an alloy steel. Scripta Metallurgica, 17(12):1443
1447, 12 1983.
[3] G. E. Lucas. The development of small specimen mechanical test techniques.
Journal of Nuclear Materials, 117:327339, 7 1983.
[4] S. M. Kurtz, C. W. Jewett, J. S. Bergstrm, J. R. Foulds, and A. A. Edidin.
Miniature specimen shear punch test for uhmwpe used in total joint replacements. Biomaterials, 23(9):19071919, 5 2002.
[5] M. A. Contreras, C. Rodrguez, F. J. Belzunce, and C. Betegn. Use of the
small punch test to determine the ductile-to-brittle transition temperature of
structural steels. Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures, 31(9):727737, 2008. Cited By (since 1996): 1.
[6] T. Misawa, T. Adachi, M. Saito, and Y. Hamaguchi. Small punch tests for
evaluating ductile-brittle transition behavior of irradiated ferritic steels. Journal of Nuclear Materials, 150(2):194202, 10 1987.
[7] Zhao-Xi Wang, Hui-Ji Shi, Jian Lu, Pan Shi, and Xian-Feng Ma. Small punch
testing for assessing the fracture properties of the reactor vessel steel with
different thicknesses. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 238(12):31863193, 12
2008.
[8] T. H. Hyde, W. Sun, and J. A. Williams. Requirements for and use of miniature test specimens to provide mechanical and creep properties of materials:
a review. International Materials Reviews, 52:213255(43), July 2007.
[9] D. T. Blagoeva and R. C. Hurst. Application of the cen (european committee for standardization) small punch creep testing code of practice to a
representative repair welded p91 pipe. Materials Science and Engineering A,
510-511(C):219223, 2009.
[10] Cwa 15627:2007 small punch test method for metallic materials.
29

30

Bibliography

[11] Standard test method for small punch testing of ultra-high molecular weight
polyethylene used in surgical implants.
[12] E. N. Campitelli, P. Sptig, R. Bonad, W. Hoffelner, and M. Victoria. Assessment of the constitutive properties from small ball punch test: Experiment
and modeling. Journal of Nuclear Materials, 335(3):366378, 2004. Cited By
(since 1996): 19.
[13] Mats Eskner and Rolf Sandstrm. Measurement of the ductile-to-brittle transition temperature in a nickel aluminide coating by a miniaturised disc bending test technique. Surface and Coatings Technology, 165(1):7180, 2/3 2003.
[14] Granta Design. Cambridge engineering selector, 2009.
[15] Tribology.
[16] Ansel C. Ugural. Stresses in plates and shells, pages 120121, Case 5,8. WCB
McGraw-Hill, Internatilnal Editions, second edition edition, 1999.