Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

60 downloads 1074 Views 3MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

5202 PA FM i-vi.qxd

10/21/08

9:41 PM

Page i

Copyright © 2008 ASM International®. All rights reserved. Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys (#05202G)

www.asminternational.org

PARAMETRIC ANALYSES OF HIGH-TEMPERATURE DATA FOR ALUMINUM ALLOYS

J. GILBERT KAUFMAN

ASM International® Materials Park, Ohio 44073-0002 www.asminternational.org

5202 PA FM i-vi.qxd

10/21/08

9:41 PM

Page ii

Copyright © 2008 by ASM International® All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of the copyright owner. First printing, December 2008

Great care is taken in the compilation and production of this book, but it should be made clear that NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ARE GIVEN IN CONNECTION WITH THIS PUBLICATION. Although this information is believed to be accurate by ASM, ASM cannot guarantee that favorable results will be obtained from the use of this publication alone. This publication is intended for use by persons having technical skill, at their sole discretion and risk. Since the conditions of product or material use are outside of ASM’s control, ASM assumes no liability or obligation in connection with any use of this information. No claim of any kind, whether as to products or information in this publication, and whether or not based on negligence, shall be greater in amount than the purchase price of this product or publication in respect of which damages are claimed. THE REMEDY HEREBY PROVIDED SHALL BE THE EXCLUSIVE AND SOLE REMEDY OF BUYER, AND IN NO EVENT SHALL EITHER PARTY BE LIABLE FOR SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHETHER OR NOT CAUSED BY OR RESULTING FROM THE NEGLIGENCE OF SUCH PARTY. As with any material, evaluation of the material under end-use conditions prior to speciﬁcation is essential. Therefore, speciﬁc testing under actual conditions is recommended. Nothing contained in this book shall be construed as a grant of any right of manufacture, sale, use, or reproduction, in connection with any method, process, apparatus, product, composition, or system, whether or not covered by letters patent, copyright, or trademark, and nothing contained in this book shall be construed as a defense against any alleged infringement of letters patent, copyright, or trademark, or as a defense against liability for such infringement. Comments, criticisms, and suggestions are invited, and should be forwarded to ASM International. Prepared under the direction of the ASM International Technical Book Committee (2007–2008), Lichun L. Chen, Chair. ASM International staff who worked on this project include Scott Henry, Senior Manager of Product and Service Development; Charles Moosbrugger, Technical Editor; Ann Britton, Editorial Assistant; Bonnie Sanders, Manager of Production; Madrid Tramble, Senior Production Coordinator; Diane Grubbs, Production Coordinator; Patty Conti, Production Coordinator; and Kathryn Muldoon, Production Assistant

Library of Congress Control Number: 2008934668 ISBN-13: 978-0-87170-715-4 ISBN-10: 0-87170-715-2 SAN: 204-7586

ASM International® Materials Park, OH 44073-0002 www.asminternational.org

Printed in the United States of America

5202 PA FM i-vi.qxd

10/21/08

9:41 PM

Page iii

Contents Data Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Wrought Alloys 1100-O, H14, H18—Stress Rupture Strength and, for the 0 Temper, Creep Strengths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2024-T851—Stress Rupture Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2219-T6, T851—Stress Rupture Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3003-O, H12, H14, H18—Stress Rupture Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3004-O, H32, H34, H38—Stress Rupture Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 5050-O—Stress Rupture Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 5052-O, H32, H34, H38, and H112—Stress Rupture Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 5083-H321 As-Welded with 5083 Filler Alloy—Stress Rupture Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 5154-O—Stress Rupture Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 5454-O, H32, H34, As-Welded H34—Stress Rupture Strength and, for the O Temper, Strength at Minimum Creep Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 5456-H321 As-Welded with 5556 Filler Alloy—Stress Rupture Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 6061-T6, T651—Stress Rupture Strength, Creep Strength, and Strength at Minimum Creep Rate . . . . . . . 112 6063-T5, T6—Strength at Minimum Creep Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Cast Alloys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 A201.0-T7—Stress Rupture Strengths. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 224.0-T63—Stress Rupture Strengths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 249.0-T63—Stress Rupture Strengths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 270.T7—0.2% Creep Strengths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 354.0-T61—Stress Rupture Strengths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 C355.0-T6—Stress Rupture Strengths. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Foreword and Acknowledgments..........................................................iv About the Author ....................................................................................v Introduction and Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters . . . . . . . . 3 Rate Process Theory and the Development of Parametric Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Larson-Miller Parameter (LMP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Manson-Haferd Parameter (MHP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Dorn-Sherby Parameter (DSP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Observations on the LMP, MHP, and DSP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Illustrative Applications of LMP, MHP, and DSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Notes about Presentation Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Alloys 1100-O and H14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Alloy 2024-T851 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Alloy 3003-O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Alloy 5454-O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Summary of Parametric Comparisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Factors Affecting Usefulness of LMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Normal Rupture Test Reproducibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Testing Laboratory Variability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Lot-to-Lot Variability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Effect of LMP Constant (CLMP) Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Choice of Cartesian versus Semi-log Plotting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Choice of Scales and Precision of Plotting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Effect of How the LMP Master Curves are Fitted to the Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Applications When Microstructural Changes are Involved . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Illustrations of Veriﬁcation and Limitations of LMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Alloys 1100-O and H14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Alloy 5454-O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Alloy 6061-T651 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Limitations of Parametric Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Presentation of Archival Master LMP Curves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Software Programs for Parametric Analyses of Creep Rupture Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Application of LMP to Comparisons of Stress Rupture Strengths of Alloys, Tempers, and Products. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Comparisons of Stress Rupture Strengths of Different Tempers of an Alloy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Comparisons of Stress Rupture Strengths of Different Products of an Alloy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Comparisons of Stress Rupture Strengths of Welds with Parent Alloys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Comparisons of Different Alloys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Application of LMP to High-Temperature Tensile Data for Aluminum Alloys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Application of LMP to Microstructural Changes and Corrosion Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Appendix 1: Aluminum Alloy and Temper Designation Systems ......................................................151 Appendix 2: Terminology and Nomenclature ..................................153 Appendix 3: Nominal Compositions and Typical Mechanical Properties of Some Aluminum Alloys ..........................155 Appendix 4: SI/Metric Unit Conversions ..........................................159 Index ....................................................................................................161

iii

5202 PA FM i-vi.qxd

10/21/08

9:41 PM

Page iv

Foreword and Acknowledgment It is the objective of this book to describe the potential usefulness of parametric analyses in analyzing and extrapolating the properties of aluminum alloys at high temperatures. It is also the intent to illustrate the use of such methods by presenting a broad spectrum of high-temperature creep data for aluminum alloys generated from a single source and developed using consistent testing procedures and practices. The author gratefully acknowledges the support of Alcoa, Inc., and in particular the efforts of Dr. Gwendolyn Dixon and her management in arranging and approving the release of the information contained herein. Alcoa, Inc. enabled the author to include many previously unpublished data and related information from Alcoa’s archives that add immeasurably to the depth and breadth of coverage. The archival parametric analyses presented herein are illustrative examples typical and representative of the respective alloys and tempers, but have no statistical basis and therefore are not to be considered as the basis for design.

iv

5202 PA FM i-vi.qxd

10/21/08

9:41 PM

Page v

About the Author J.G. (Gil) Kaufman has a background of more than 50 years in the aluminum and materials information industries, and remains an active consultant in both areas. In 1997, he retired as Vice President, Technology for the Aluminum Association, Inc., headquartered in Washington, D.C., and is currently president of his consulting company, Kaufman Associates. Earlier in his career, he spent 26 years with the Aluminum Company of America, where he managed engineering properties and fabricating metallurgical research at Alcoa Laboratories. Many of the data presented in this volume were generated over the period when the author was active in and/or managing Alcoa Laboratories engineering properties research. Kaufman spent 5 years with ARCO Metals, where he was Director of R&D and, later, Vice President, Research & Engineering. Kaufman also served for 9 years as President and CEO of the National Materials Property Data Network where, working with STN International and Chemical Abstracts Service, he established a worldwide online network of more than 25 numeric materials databases. Gil is a Fellow and Honorary Member of ASTM and a Fellow and Life Member of ASM International. He has published more than 130 articles, including ﬁve books, on aluminum alloys and materials data systems.

v

Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys J. Gilbert Kaufman, p 1-2 DOI: 10.1361/paht2008p001

Copyright © 2008 ASM International® All rights reserved. www.asminternational.org

Introduction and Background The properties of aluminum alloys are dependent on both the temperature to which they are exposed and also, for temperatures above room temperature, to the length of time of exposure at temperature. One consequence of this is a need for designers of structures intended for very long-life service at high temperatures to be able to anticipate the combined effect of temperature and time at temperature on the properties for the entire service life based on data from relatively shorter time experimental testing. For relatively short-life structures, the need is addressed simply by planning ahead and carrying out a test plan that replicates the intended service conditions. This is quite practical for structures whose life may be as much as a year, or perhaps even 5 years, but does not generally cover rather typical design lives of 10, 20, or 30 years, or longer. The need for the ability to judge performance for relatively long service lives has been addressed for more than 50 years (Ref 1–3) through the use of time-temperature parametric equations that permit the folding of data obtained over a variety of temperatures and exposure times into a single relationship. Once that relationship is established with adequate consistency and reliability, it is possible to extrapolate the available data to anticipate service lives that substantially exceed the range of test data. This must always be done cautiously and with awareness of the extent of the extrapolation, but it provides a better perspective than simply extrapolating individual strength life curves. The need for some sort of parametric relationship involving stress, time, and temperature may be visualized readily by observing a representative set of stress rupture strength data for 5454-O in Fig. 5454-1 (Ref 4) plotted as rupture stress as a function of time under load at temperature. The data for each temperature appear as discrete lines of decreasing rupture stress with increasing time at temperature. Typically, such curves extend out to between 1000 and 10,000 hours because that represents the practical limits of testing time in advance of designing some commercial structure. Despite the individual lines for each test temperature in Fig. 5454-1, it appears intuitively that there is some relationship among these curves. It would be highly desirable and helpful in extrapolating to longer service lives if these curves could be combined and consolidated into a single relationship representing all of the data for all temperatures, as for example in Fig. 5454-2. It is precisely such consolidation that parametric analyses try to accomplish, and it is the background and application of such analyses that we discuss in this book. The theoretical background and development of the time-temperature parametric relationships are covered in greater depth, but

it is appropriate to introduce those that are the focus of this volume at this point. A number of fairly commonly used parameters have been developed over the years, and most are based on what is termed “rate process theory.” Three versions of such timetemperature parameters are dealt with herein, notably: The Larson-Miller parameter (Ref 1): LMP = T (C + log t)

The Manson-Haferd parameter (Ref 5, 6): MHP =

Log t − log t a T − Ta

The Dorn-Sherby parameter (Ref 7): DSP = t e⫺A/T

where T is the temperature, °R; t is the time at temperature; and ta, Ta, A, and C are constants deﬁned by the respective experimenters. These parameters have been applied with considerable success over the years, especially to stress rupture data for a variety of metals and, to a lesser extent, to creep rates and total accumulated creep of various amounts. While not necessarily showing a technical advantage over the other two parameters, the Larson-Miller Parameter (LMP) has become the most widely used, for aluminum alloys at least, primarily in the author’s judgment because of its ease and simplicity of application. As a result, the bulk of the information presented herein focuses on the LMP. It is timely and useful to consider the value of parametric relationships not only for creep and stress rupture data but also for elevated temperature tensile property data and even for resistance to stress-corrosion cracking. For this purpose we focus on data for aluminum alloys, notably those used for ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Codes and for other high-temperature applications and also for alloys subjected through service exposure to long-term hightemperature service. Brieﬂy, then, the scope of this book includes:

• • • • • • •

Review of the theoretical basis for the parametric relationships Some illustrations and comparisons of the application of three parametric relationships for several aluminum alloys Factors affecting the usefulness of time-temperature parameters Illustrations of the veriﬁcation and limitations of time-temperature-parameters Presentation of archival Larson-Miller parametric analyses to stress-rupture data for a variety of aluminum alloys Presentation of some new analyses of archival data Application of LMP to comparisons of the stress rupture strengths of aluminum alloys, tempers, and products

2 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

• •

Application of the parametric relationships to high-temperature tensile properties of aluminum alloys Applications of the parametric relationships for anticipating microstructural changes in aluminum alloys

It is appropriate to note that throughout this volume, the Aluminum Association alloy and temper designation systems are used and that the compositions and tensile properties of the materials for which data are presented herein met all aluminum alloys speciﬁcations of the Aluminum Association. Both the alloy and temper designation systems and the composition and tensile property speciﬁcations for all aluminum alloys are presented in Aluminum Standards and Data published by the Aluminum Association and updated on a regular basis (the current issue at this writing was published in 2006) and also in the American National Standards Institute publications H35.1 and H35.2, published for ANSI by the Aluminum Association. A brief summary of the Aluminum Association Alloy and Temper Designation Systems is presented in Appendix 1. A list of the aluminum industry terminology and nomenclature used throughout the volume is presented in Appendix 2. Most of the industry terms are those from Aluminum Standards and Data. There are a few abbreviations used regularly in the text, tables, and ﬁgures:

• • • • • • • •

LMP, Larson-Miller parameter MHP, Manson-Haferd parameter DSP, Dorn-Sherby parameter CLMP, the constant C in the Larson-Miller parameter T, test temperature t, time at test temperature AW, as welded HTAW, heat treated and aged after welding

Appendix 3 provides for background information the nominal compositions and typical mechanical properties of all of the

aluminum alloys and tempers for which creep rupture data are presented or referenced in this volume. It is also appropriate to note that throughout most of this volume, principal focus is placed on the calculation and presentation of mechanical properties in the English or engineering system, rather than the International Standard System of Units (SI) or metric units. This was done because all of the tabular and graphical data presented herein were generated using the English/engineering system, calculated conversions other than when convenient would have added the potential for distortion of the presentations. For those interested in a more in-depth discussion of SI/metric units and their use in parametric analysis, see Appendix 4. REFERENCES 1. F.R. Larson and J. Miller, A Time-Temperature Relationship for Rupture and Creep Stresses, Trans. ASME, Vol 74, July 1952, p 765–771 2. F.C. Monkman and N.J. Grant, An Empirical Relationship between Rupture Life and Minimum Creep Rate in Creep Rupture Tests, Transactions of 59th Annual Meeting of ASTM, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 1956, p 593–605 3. J.G. Kaufman, Discussion Ref 2 in Transactions of 59th Annual Meeting of ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 1956, p 606–612 4. K.O. Bogardus, R.C. Malcolm, and M. Holt, “Extrapolation of Creep-Rupture Data for Aluminum Alloys,” presented at the 1968 ASM Materials Engineering Congress (Detroit, MI), D8-100, American Society for Metals, 1968, p 361–390 5. S.S. Manson, “Design Considerations for Long Life at Elevated Temperatures,” Technical Report TP-1-63, NASA, 1963 6. S.S. Manson and A.M. Haferd, “A Linear Time-Temperature Relation for Extrapolation of Creep and Stress-Rupture Data,” Technical Note 2890, NACA, March, 1953 7. O.D. Sherby and J.E. Dorn, Creep Correlations in Alpha Solid Solutions of Aluminum, Transactions of AIME, Vol 194, 1952

Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys J. Gilbert Kaufman, p 3-21 DOI: 10.1361/paht2008p003

Copyright © 2008 ASM International® All rights reserved. www.asminternational.org

Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters Rate Process Theory and the Development of Parametric Relationships Much of the early application and evolution of the high-temperature parametric relationships to data for aluminum alloys were carried out during the 1950s and 1960s under the auspices of the MPC, then known as the Metals Properties Council (now the Materials Properties Council). However, the real origins of the relationships go back considerably further. The “rate process theory” was ﬁrst proposed by Eyring in 1936 (Ref 1) and was ﬁrst applied to metals by Kauzmann (Ref 2) and Dushman et al. (Ref 3). It may be expressed mathematically as: r AeQ(S)/RT

where r is the rate for the process in question, A is a constant, Q(S) is the activation energy for the process in question, R is the gas constant, and T is absolute temperature. Over the years from 1945 to 1950, several investigators, including Fisher and McGregor (Ref 4, 5), Holloman (Ref 6–8), Zener (Ref 7), and Jaffe (Ref 8) were credited with recognizing that for metals high-temperature processes such as creep rupture performance, tempering, and diffusion appear to obey rate process theories expressible by the above equation. In 1963, Manson and Haferd (Ref 9) were credited with showing that all three of the parametric relationships introduced in the section “Introduction and Background” derive from: P=

(log t ) σ Q − log t A (T − TA ) R

where P is a parameter combining the effects of time, temperature, and stress; s is stress, ksi; T is absolute temperature; and TA, log tA, Q, and R are constants dependent on the material.

Larson-Miller Parameter (LMP) For the LMP, Larson and Miller (Ref 10) elected to use the following values of the four constants in the rate process equation: Q0

R 1.0 TA 460 °F or 0 °R tA the constant C in the LMP

Thus, the general equation reduces to: P (log t + C) (T) or LMP T(C + log t)

This analysis has the advantage that log tA or C is the only constant that must be deﬁned by analysis of the data in question, and it is in effect equal to the following at isostress values: C (LMP/T) log t

In such a relationship, isostress data (i.e., data for the same stress but derived from different time-temperature exposure) plotted as the reciprocal of T versus log t should deﬁne straight lines, and the lines for the various stress values should intersect at a point where 1/T 0 and log t the value of the unknown constant C. Larson and Miller took one step further in their original proposal, suggesting that the value of constant C (referred to as CLMP hereinafter) could be taken as 20 for many metallic materials. Other authors have suggested that the value of the constant varies from alloy to alloy and also with such factors as cold work, thermomechanical processing, and phase transitions or other structural modiﬁcations. From a practical standpoint, most applications of the LMP are made by ﬁrst calculating the value of CLMP that provides the best ﬁt in the parametric plotting of the raw data, and values for aluminum alloys, for example, have been shown to range from about 13 to 27.

Manson-Haferd Parameter (MHP) For the MHP, Manson and Haferd (Ref 9, 11) chose the following values for the constants in the rate process equation: Q0 R 1.0

4 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Under these assumptions, the general equation reduces to: P=

log t − log t A T − TA

In this case, there are two constants to be evaluated, log tA and TA. Manson and Haferd proposed that isostress data be plotted as T versus log t and the coordinates of the point of convergence be taken as the values for log tA and TA. It may be noted that the key difference between the LMP and MHP approaches is the selection of TA absolute zero as the temperature where the isostress lines will converge in the LMP while in the MHP TA is determined empirically, or in effect allowed to “ﬂoat.”

Dorn-Sherby Parameter (DSP) Dorn and Sherby (Ref 12) based their relationship more directly on the Eyring rate-process equation: DSP teA/T

where t is time, A is a constant based on activation energy, and T is absolute temperature. This relationship, like the others, implies that isostress tests results at various temperatures should deﬁne straight lines when log t is plotted against the reciprocal of temperature. However, it differs from the other approaches in that these straight-line plots are indicated to be parallel rather than converging at values of log t and 1/T.

Observations on the LMP, MHP, and DSP The essential signiﬁcance of the differences in the three parameters described previously and applied herein may be illustrated by the schematic representations in Fig. 1 based on the

relationship assumed of the relationships between log t and 1/T (Ref 6). As noted in the previous discussions, the LMP assumes that the isostress lines converge on the ordinate of a log time versus inverse temperature plot, while the MHP assumes convergence at some speciﬁc value of both log t and 1/T. The DSP assumes the isostress lines are parallel rather than radiating from a speciﬁc value of coordinates log t and 1/T. As representative data illustrated in this book show, the impact of the differences on the results of analyses with the three different parameters is not very great. It is appropriate to note that a number of variations on the three parameters described previously have been proposed, primarily including such things as letting the values of the various constants, such as the C in the LMP and the activations energy A in the DSP, “ﬂoat.” None of these have seemed a useful extension of the originals. It is common practice to use the available raw data to calculate or determine graphically the values of the needed constants, but then once established to hold them constant. Allowing the constants in any of the relationships to ﬂoat, for example, the activation energy in the DSP, results in a different type of analysis in which the isostress lines are curves, not straight lines, and considerably complicates its routine use.

Illustrative Applications of LMP, MHP, and DSP Several interesting facets of the value and limitations of the parametric relationships may be seen from looking at representative illustrations for the following four alloys and tempers where all three parameters are applied to the same sets of data.

• •

σ1 < σ2 < σ3 < σ4 σ4

σ4

ta, Ta

σ3

σ3 σ2

σ4

σ1

0

1/T

σ2

σ3

σ1

0

σ1

σ2

T

0

1/T

Comparison of assumed constant stress versus temperature relationships for Larson-Miller (left), Manson-Haferd (center), and Dorn-Sherby (right). T, exposure temperature, absolute; t, exposure time, h; σ, test/exposure stress.

Fig. 1

•

•

1100-O, commercially pure aluminum, annealed (O) 2024-T851, a solution heat treated aluminum-copper (Al-Cu) alloy, the series most widely used for high-temperature aerospace applications. The T851 temper is aged to peak strength, so subsequent exposure at elevated temperatures results in overaging, and some microstructural changes may be expected. 3003-O, a lightly alloyed non heat treatable aluminum-manganese (Al-Mn) alloy, widely used for heat exchanger applications. It is annealed so no further transitions in structures are anticipated as it is further exposed to high temperatures. 5454-O, the highest strength aluminum-magnesium (Al-Mg) alloy recommended for applications involving high temperatures. Because of the higher alloying, there may be diffusion of constituent with high-temperature exposure even in the annealed temper.

Many other alloys and tempers are included in the group for which master parametric relationships are presented in the section “Presentation of Archival Master LMP Curves.” It is appropriate to note that some components of the following presentations are based on the efforts of Bogardus, Malcolm, and Holt of Alcoa Laboratories, who ﬁrst published their preliminary assessment of these parametric relationships in 1968 (Ref 13).

Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters / 5

Notes about Presentation Format Generally, plots of stress rupture strength or any other property are presented with the property on the ordinate scale and the parameter on the abscissa, as in Fig. 1100-8. From the descriptions in Chapter 2, all three of the parameters discussed herein include both time and temperature, so it is useful to note that the parametric plots can also be presented as in Fig. 2043-3, 2024-6, or 2024-7, examples of the three parameters in which at the bottom, abscissa scales showing how the combination of temperature and time are represented. This type of presentation is often useful for individuals using the parameters for extrapolations, but it is not a necessary part of the presentation. Therefore, the multiple abscissa axes showing time and temperature are not included as a general rule through this volume unless the archival version included them. It is also appropriate to clarify at this stage that the values shown for the Larson-Miller parameter on the abscissas are in thousands and are presented as LMP/103; thus for example, in Fig. 1100-8, the numbers from 13 to 21 on the abscissa are actually 13,000 to 21,000. For the Manson-Haferd and Dorn-Sherby parameters, the values are as shown.

Alloys 1100-O and H14 Table 1100-1 presents a summary of the stress rupture strength data for 1100-O and 1100-H14; the discussion immediately following focuses on the O temper data. This summary is for rather extensive tests of single lots of material. Other lots of 1100 were also tested, as is illustrated later, but this material was the basis of the best documented master curves for 1100-O and H14. The data are plotted in the format of stress rupture strength as a function of rupture life in Fig. 1100-1 and Fig. 1100-2 for the O and H14 tempers, respectively. LMP for 1100-O. Figure. 1100-3 shows the archival master LMP curve developed for 1100-O derived with a value of the Larson-Miller parameter constant CLMP of 25.3. The isostress calculations leading to the selection of this value of CLMP no longer exist. Scatter and deviations are small, and the curve appears to represent the data reasonably well. MHP for 1100-O. The isostress plot of log t and temperature is shown in Fig. 1100-4. The isostress lines are not straight nor do they seem to converge as projected by Manson and Haferd, but values of the constants may be judged from projections of the straight portions of the ﬁtted lines as: log tA = 21.66 and TA = –500. The resultant master MHP curve is illustrated in Fig. 1100-5. With the exception of several points obtained in tests at 250 oF, the ﬁt is reasonably good. DSP for 1100-O. Calculations of the activation energy constant for the DSP resulted in a value of 44,100, and the resultant master curve is illustrated in Fig. 1100-6. With the exception of the data for the lower temperatures, the ﬁt is reasonably good. Comparisons of the Parameters. All three parametric relationships represent data for 1100-O reasonably well. An additional useful comparison test is the degree of agreement in extrapolated values for predicted rupture life after 10,000 and 100,000 h:

Temperature, °F

212 300 400 500

Desired service rupture life, h

10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000

LMP rupture strength, ksi

6.0 5.3 3.7 3.0 2.5 2.1 1.1 <1.0

MHP rupture strength, ksi

5.4 4.0 3.0 2.3 2.4 1.4 1.1 <1.0

DSP rupture strength, ksi

5.9 5.0 3.2 2.7 1.9 1.5 1.0 <1.0

There is fairly good agreement among the extrapolated values for the three parameters, usually 1 ksi or less variation. It is notable that the MHP usually provided the lowest extrapolated value, while the LMP provided the highest, usually by less than 0.5 ksi.

Alloy 2024-T851 Figures 2024-1 and 2024-2 provide graphical summaries of the stress rupture strengths of 2024-T851 over the temperature range from room temperature (75 oF, or 535 oR) through 700 oF (1160 o R). The data in Fig. 2024-1 are plotted as rupture strength as a function of rupture time for each test temperature, and those of Fig. 2024-2 are plotted as a function of temperature. The raw test data are tabulated in Table 2024-1, along with the archival isostress calculations. LMP for 2024-T851. Table 2024-1 summarizes the isostress calculations to determine the LMP constant CLMP for 2024-T851. The calculations show quite a range of potential values for CLMP, ranging from about 13 through 26. It is to be expected that changes in rate-process-type reactions would be in evidence for 2024-T851, as it had originally been aged to maximum strength; subsequent exposure to high temperatures results in increased precipitation of alloying constituents at varying rates and, eventually, recrystallization. The general tendency is for CLMP to decrease with both longer rupture life and also with increasing temperature. Since the longlife values tend to best represent the range into which extrapolations of data for design purposes are most likely to be needed, there is a general practice to place greater weight on the values of CLMP for longer lives. Figure 2024-3 is a master LMP curve for 2024-T851 based on an assumed value of CLMP15.9. To facilitate interpretation, time-temperature pairs are shown along with the LMP values on the abscissa. Several observations can readily be made. The data for room temperature do not ﬁt with the remainder of the data and are ignored in the analysis. In addition, for each test temperature, the higher shorter-life data plots create “tails” off of the resultant master curve; these fade into the master curve as rupture life increases. The longer-life and higher-temperature data ﬁt rather well into a relatively smooth curve, not surprisingly, given the selection of a value of C deriving most heavily from the longerlife data. Figure 2024-4 presents the “extrapolated” curves of stress versus rupture life for 2024-T851 utilizing the value of CLMP = 15.9. Additional discussion and illustrations of the effect of varying the values of C are included later.

6 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys MHP for 2024-T851. A graphical presentation of the isostress lines of log t versus T plotted by the least squares method to determine the MHP constant is shown in Fig. 2024-5. There is some variability, especially at the highest and lowest stress values, but a fair convergence of data at values of log t = 10.3, which becomes the value of ta, and a value of temperature (TA) of 45 oF (505 oR). Figure 2024-6 is a MHP master curve for 2024-T851. Aside from the data from room-temperature tests, which have been completely ignored, the ﬁt is quite good. There is no obvious evidence of the “tails” for shorter-life data in the MHP curve. DSP for 2024-T851. Calculations for the activation energy constant in the DSP, shown in Table 2024-2, yielded a value of 43,300. The resultant master curve derived from analysis with the Dorn-Sherby parameter is illustrated in Fig. 2024-7. Even the room-temperature data may be considered to ﬁt reasonably well, but they were ignored in drawing the main part of the curve. There is some small evidence of shorter-time data resulting in “tails” off the curve, but these are much less pronounced than those for the LMP master curve. Comparisons for 2024-T851. The master curves for the LMP, MHP, and DSP in Fig. 2024-3, 6, and 7 are useful for making some extrapolations and seeing how they compare. For applications like boilers and pressure vessels it is common to make the best judgments possible for 100,000 h stress ruptures strengths, and so in Fig. 2024-8, values of 100,000 h rupture life are shown for a variety of stresses for 2024-T851. The ﬁrst overall observation is that of fairly good agreement among the extrapolations based on the three methods. There are subtle differences, however. At higher stresses, the LMP projects 2 to 3 ksi lower (more conservative) rupture stresses than the other two, while at lower stresses, the LMP and DSP provide 2 to 3 ksi higher rupture stresses. Percentagewise, the signiﬁcance of the differences at lower stresses is fairly substantial. The apparent agreement of the LMP and DSP in this range provides some basis for putting greater faith in those values.

Alloy 3003-O Figure 3003-1 and 3003-2 provide graphical summaries of the stress rupture strengths for 3003-O over the temperature range from room temperature (75 °F, or 535 °R) through 600 °F (1060 °R). The rupture strengths are plotted in Fig. 3003-1 as a function of rupture time for each test temperature and in Fig. 3003-2 as a function of test temperature. LMP for 3003-O. The original isostress calculations to determine the CLMP for 3003-O are no longer available. A value of CLMP 16, the archival master LMP curve in Fig. 3003-3 was generated. There is some evidence of the “tails” associated with the short-life test results at lower temperatures, but in total the master curve looks reasonable and represents most of the data well. Another curve was also developed using CLMP 17.5 illustrated in Fig. 3003-4, and the “tails” largely disappear, and a smoother curve is generated. MHP for 3003-O. Figure 3003-5 illustrates the isostress plot for 3003-O. Convergence is far aﬁeld of the plotted data, but values of the constants were judged to be TA230 and log tA 14.

Figure 3003-6 contains the MHP master curve for 3003-O calculated using the above constants. In this case, “tails” are very much in evidence for the MHP analysis as for the LMP analysis. Nevertheless, a seemingly useful master curve for long-life extrapolations is obtained. DSP for 3003-O. A DSP activation energy constant of 35,000 was calculated from the 3003-O data, and the derived master DSP curve is presented in Fig. 3003-7. In this instance, the DSP curve, like the LMP and MHP curves, shows clearly the lack of ﬁt of short-life data at several temperatures, but a useful master curve for long-life extrapolation seems to be present. Comparisons for 3003-O. Once again, the extrapolation to 100,000 rupture life is used as a basis of comparing the results of the three parameters, as illustrated in Fig. 3003-8. Initial inspection shows fairly good agreement; however, once again there are subtle but perhaps important differences. The LMP and DSP show the best agreement, especially at lower stresses, where the extrapolated values range from about 2 to 4 ksi higher than the MHP extrapolations. There is some evidence that at very low stresses (at or below 2 ksi), the differences are inconsequential.

Alloy 5454-O Figure 5454-1 provides a graphical summary of the original archival stress rupture strengths for 5454-O as a function of rupture life for each test temperature. LMP for 5454-O. Table 5454-1 summarizes the isostress calculations to determine the LMP for 5454-O. The range of values of CLMP is relatively narrow, about 11 through 15, and absent any large trends toward higher or lower values at long rupture lives. In this case, a value of CLMP of 14.3, close to the average of all calculations, was used in developing the archival master LMP curve in Fig. 5454-2. The LMP master curve is relatively uniform and consistent, lacking any signiﬁcant distortions. Figure 5454-3 presents the raw stress rupture strength versus life data extrapolated based on the LMP master curve in Fig. 5454-2. MHP for 5454-O. Figure 5454-4 illustrates the isostress plot for 5454-O needed to generate the MHP constants. In this case, there is considerable variation in the shape of the individual isostress lines, and only those for stresses of about 20 or above strongly suggest convergence. Giving more weight to those lines results in values of TA 161 and log tA 11.25. Figure 5454-5 contains the MHP master curve for 5454-O calculated using the above constants. Despite the difficulties with convergence of the isostress lines, the resulting MHP master curve is relatively uniform and consistent, DSP for 5454-O. A DSP activation energy constant of 31,400 was calculated, as in Table 5454-2, for the 5454-O data, and the derived master DSP curve is presented in Fig. 5454-6. In this instance, the DSP curve, like the LMP and MHP curves, provides a rather uniform and consistent ﬁt with the data. Comparisons for 5454-O. Extrapolations for both 10,000 and 100,000 h for 5454-O based on the three parameters are:

Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters / 7

Temperature, °F

212 300 400 500

Desired service rupture life, h

LMP rupture strength, ksi

MHP rupture strength, ksi

DSP rupture strength, ksi

10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000

17 14 10 7.5 4.1 3.2 2.3 1.9

16 10 8 4.1 3.5 2.1 2.0 (a)

17 13 9 5.5 3.9 2.5 2.1 (a)

(a) Data do not support extrapolation to this level.

As for the other alloys discussed previously, there is generally fairly good agreement among values extrapolated from the three parameters. However, once again the MHP master curve consistently yielded slightly lower rupture strengths than the other two, and the LMP-based values were generally the highest by a small margin. The divergence was larger for 100,000 h values than for 10,000 h values, as would be expected, and at 300 oF, the divergence was rather signiﬁcant (a range of 3.4 ksi, about 50%).

Summary of Parametric Comparisons As noted previously, all three parameters (LMP, MHP, and DSP) provide generally relatively good overall ﬁt to the raw data, other than occasional “tails” resulting from deviations of relatively short-time tests at the lower temperatures from the broader trends. Since the purpose of the parametric analyses is long-life extrapolation, it is most important that the longer-time test data for various temperatures ﬁt a reasonable and consistent pattern. Also there was generally fair agreement in extrapolated service strengths for 10,000 and/or 100,000 h though the MHP rather consistently projected slightly lower long-time rupture strengths than the other two parameters. Of the three parametric relationships described previously, the Larson-Miller Parameter (LMP) was chosen as the principal parametric tool to be used by the experts, including those at Alcoa Laboratories, in developing the bases for extrapolations to project creep and rupture strengths for longer lives than practical based on empirical testing. The primary reasoning was that since all three approaches gave similar results within reasonable experimental error (see the section “Testing Laboratory Variability”), the LMP was signiﬁcantly simpler to use both for calculations of the constant CLMP and for subsequent iterations with different values of CLMP to see how curve ﬁt with raw data was affected. Much of this work was carried out prior to the era of computer generation of master curves and was based on relatively tedious and repetitious hand calculations. Such analyses were routinely used to generate design values for aluminum alloys for applications such as the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code (Ref 14). Subsequently, the data presentations and discussion throughout the remainder of this volume focus on applications of the LMP, and will provide considerable insight into the sources and results of experimental and procedural variability.

Factors Affecting Usefulness of LMP There are several very basic factors that can inﬂuence the variability in the accuracy and precision of properties developed by parametric extrapolation over and above normal test reproducibility. Some are experimental in nature; others are within the analytical and graphical presentations of the data. Among the most important are the following each of which is discussed in the following section:

• • • • • •

Normal rupture test reproducibility Testing laboratory variability Lot-to-lot variations for a given alloy/temper/product The selection of the constant, CLMP, in the Larson-Miller parametric equation The scales and precision of plotting the master curve Microstructural changes that occur in the material as a result of the time-temperature conditions to which it is exposed

The opportunity to examine all of these variables exists within the data presented herein.

Normal Rupture Test Reproducibility One of the most basic factors inﬂuencing extrapolations, no matter how they are carried out, is the variability in creep rupture test results run under presumably identical conditions, usually referred to as scatter in test results. In creep rupture tests, the controlled variable is usually the applied stress, and the dependent variable is rupture life at the applied stress. Data for 5454-O, taken from the extended summary for a single lot of plate of that alloy in Table 5454-4, provide some interesting representative examples of the magnitude of this variation:

Test temperature, °F

350 350 400

Applied creep stress, ksi

Number of replicate tests

14 11 9

3 5 7

Rupture lives, h

64, 75, 106 484, 510, 360, 391, 435 158, 188, 170, 198, 132, 150, 164

Average rupture life, h

Percent range in life from average

82 436 166

±26 ±17 ±20

An additional opportunity for comparisons of replicate test variability exists in the data for 6061-T651 in Table 6061-1. Some examples from those data are: Test temperature, °F

350 400 450 450 450 500 550 600 650 700 700

Applied creep stress, ksi

Number of replicate tests

21 21 13 13 11 13 8 6 3 3 2.5

2 6 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2

Rupture lives, h

Average rupture life, h

Percent Range in life from average

1663, 1912 70, 74, 72, 67, 72, 69 177, 257 121, 182 681, 941 11, 23, 33 76, 102 38,45 79, 115 15, 20 181, 227

1788 71 217 152 811 22 89 234 97 18 204

±14 ±6 ±24 ±20 ±16 ±50 ±15 ±8 ±19 ±14 ±11

8 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys These two examples illustrate the fact that ranges in rupture life as great as about ±20% of the average rupture life are likely to be seen in replicate tests, and in some instances, even in very reliable laboratories, ranges of ±50% may occasionally be observed. These observations suggest that when extrapolating data by whatever means, ranges in average rupture strength at a given rupture life of ±1 to 2 ksi should not be unexpected. This provides a useful yardstick for comparisons of other test variables and the precision to be expected of extrapolations.

Testing Laboratory Variability Data for 6061-T651 plate in Table 6061-1 provide a unique opportunity to examine the result of having several different testing laboratories involved in a single program, or in assessing the effect of trying to compare results obtained from several laboratories. Three different experienced laboratories were involved in the program for which the results are presented in Table 6061-1; they are designated simply A, B, and C for purposes of this publication. All three were deep in creep rupture testing experience, and all three inputted data for consideration for design properties for the Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code of ASME (Ref 14). Some direct comparisons of tests carried out at the same test temperatures and applied creep rupture stresses are summarized in Table 6061-7, together with calculations of the average rupture lives and deviations of the individual values from the averages. For the 18 direct comparisons available for 6061-T651, the average difference in individual tests from the average was 22%, with the individual differences generally ranging from 1% to 41% with one extreme of an 81% difference. This average difference of ±22% is in the same range as the variation in replicate tests at a single laboratory from the section “Normal Rupture Test Reproducibility,” which makes it difficult to say these differences are related to the laboratories or just more evidence of the scatter in replicate tests. At any rate, the use of multiple reliable laboratories does not seem to further increase the variability in creep rupture test data. One added note: in the lab-to-lab differences summarized in Table 6061-7, Lab A reported longer lives in 14 of the 17 cases where it was compared with Labs B and/or C, and the average difference for those cases alone was ±25%, 3% more than the overall average, and possibly signiﬁcant. It is impossible to say many years in hindsight whether this was related to any basic differences in test procedures, and therefore which of the labs if any generated more or less reliable data. Possible reasons for differences from lab to lab could include variables such as (a) differences in alignment (better alignment leading to longer rupture lives); (b) differences in temperature measurement precision, accuracy, and control; and (c) uniformity of conditions throughout the life of the test.

Lot-to-Lot Variability Aluminum Association speciﬁcations for aluminum alloy products published in Aluminum Standards & Data provide acceptable ranges of both composition and tensile properties for each alloy, temper, and product deﬁned therein. Just as multiple lots of the same alloy, temper, and product have some acceptable variation in chemical composition and tensile properties within the appropriate

prescribed speciﬁcation limits, those lots may also be expected to have some variability in creep rupture properties. The variability may be even greater when different products of the same alloy and temper are included in the comparison. This is illustrated by master LMP curves developed individually for three lots of 5454-O, one of rolled and drawn rod and two of plate, and illustrated in Fig. 5454-7, 8, and 9, respectively. A composite curve was also developed, and it is shown in Fig. 5454-10. The curves for the separate lots are largely similar in shape and range for both stress and LMP values, but the LMP constants CLMP calculated for the three, ranging from 13.954 to 17.554 (the precision of the original investigators is retained here), with the composite CLMP being 15.375, resulting in three independent curves for the three lots. Table 5454-6 provides an illustration of the variations in extrapolated service lives of 10,000 and 100,000 h would be inﬂuenced by the use of data from any of the individual lots of 5454-O. Despite the use of the three different sets of data for the three different lots, leading to differing CLMP values, it is very interesting and useful to note that the 100,000 h. rupture strengths vary no more than ±1 ksi from the composite value and are often much less divergent.

Effect of LMP Constant (CLMP ) Selection A very logical concern to the materials data analyst is the effect of variations in the LMP constant selected for the analysis of a speciﬁc set of data on the precision and accuracy of extrapolations made based on LMP. This is particularly important as the selection of the LMP constant may be somewhat subjective, especially when cold worked or heat treated tempers are involved. While there are times when a single speciﬁc value of the constant may be indicated by the variety of isostress pairs available for a speciﬁc alloy and temper, more often there is a range of LMP values generated, sometimes varying in some manner with temperature and rupture life. The ﬁnal selection of constant is often made in consideration of the part of the LMP master curve most clearly involved in the extrapolation(s) to be made. In particular, that is often a value of the constant that best ﬁts the long-life data points. Thus it is useful to examine the effects of variations in the range of LMP constant utilized on the resultant extrapolations, and there are several data sets available to allow that comparison, including 1100-O, 5454-O and H34, and 6061-T6. Alloy 1100-O. Figure 1100-7 illustrates the master LMP curves for 1100-O plotted using several different values of CLMP based on the calculations in Table 1100-2. Included in the range of CLMP values are the extreme low value of 13.9 observed for 1100-O to the highest value of 25.3 used in the archival plot (Fig. 1100-3). It is apparent from Fig. 1100-7 that on the scale used in this plot, the highest and lowest values of CLMP each lead to a “family” of curves, while the intermediate value, and especially the value of 17.4, provides a relatively smooth relationship reasonably represented by a single curve. It is useful to see how these four LMP relationships based on the different CLMP values would agree when used for extrapolation for 20 and 50 year service lives. Extrapolated estimated

Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters / 9 creep rupture strengths for 1100-O based on these plots are shown in Table 1100-3. Considering the range in CLMP values, there is remarkable agreement among the extrapolated values, especially for the 20 year values. More divergence is noted among the 50 year values, especially at 200 and 250 oF; at higher temperatures, even the 50 year values are usually within ±0.2 ksi (which is about 10% at the lower levels). Alloy 2024-T851. It was noted in the section “Illustrative Examples of LMP, MHP, and DSP” that the isostress calculations for 2024-T851 led to a fairly wide range of values of CLMP. Reexamination of the isostress calculations in Table 2024-1 illustrates that there is a pattern to the variation, such that the values generated using isostresses at 37 ksi or higher averaged 21.8 while at isostress below 37 ksi CLMP averaged 16 ksi. LMP master curves have been generated and are presented in Fig. 2024-9 for the two extremes plus the overall average value of 18.4. All three curves provide a reasonably good ﬁt for the data, but as would be expected the ﬁt at higher stresses is better with the higher value of CLMP, while the ﬁt at lower stresses is better with the lower value of CLMP. It is useful to see how this difference in selection of CLMP values would affect the extrapolated values for 10,000 and 100,000 h service stresses:

In this case, the projections for rupture strengths at 10,000 and 100,000 h for 5454-H34 plate are: Temperature °F

°R

212

672

300

760

400

860

500

960

Desired service rupture life, h

LMP; CLMP = 14.3 rupture strength, ksi

10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000

LMP: CLMP = 17 rupture strength, ksi

21 15 10 7.5 4.1 3.2 2.3 1.9

20 17 11 8 (a) (a) (a) (a)

(a) Data do not support extrapolation to this level.

The agreement in extrapolated rupture strengths is very reasonable, being ±1 ksi in all but one case. Taken together, these examples illustrate that when using the LMP every attempt should be made to obtain the CLMP value providing optimal ﬁt to the data and drawing the master curves carefully. While failure to do so is not likely to greatly mislead the investigator unless the process is pretty badly ﬂawed, it should be recognized that the higher CLMP values are likely to provide the least conservative projections.

Choice of Cartesian versus Semi-log Plotting Temperature °F

°R

212

672

300

760

350

810

400

860

500

960

Desired service rupture life, H

CLMP 16 rupture strength, ksi

CLMP 18.4 rupture strength, ksi

CLMP 21.8 rupture strength, ksi

10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000

49.5 44.0 34.0 26.0 23.0 14.5 13.0 8.0 5.0 3.5

49.5 45.5 35.0 28.0 24.5 17.5 15.0 9.0 5.0 3.5

50.0 46.5 36.5 31.0 26.5 21 17.5 12.0 5.5 4.0

From Fig. 2024-4(a), ksi

49.5 45.0 35.0 26.0 23.0 15.0 14.0 8.0 5.0 4.0

(a) Stress rupture strengths from archival curves generated with CLMP = 15.9

While the extrapolated values depend to a considerable extent on how the master curves are drawn through the plotted points, several consistent trends are evident. While there is often fairly good agreement, it can be seen that the extrapolated values trend higher with the higher CLMP values. The good agreement between the values extrapolated from Fig. 2024-T851 and those from the table generated with CLMP 16 is to be expected since the archival calculations were made with of CLMP 15.9. The other trend, also to be expected, is that agreement is better at the shorter-range extrapolation for 10,000 h than for 100,000 h. This illustrates the care required to generate CLMP values providing optimum ﬁt to the data and to apply great care in drawing the master curve once the raw data are converted to LMP values and plotted. Alloy 5454-H34. Stress rupture life data for 5454-H34 have been analyzed with two values on CLMP in Fig. 5454-17 and 545418. The original archival value of CLMP equal to 14.3 was used to generate Fig. 5454-17, and a more recent review of all the data generated subsequently (and included in Table 5454-5) were used to generate the CLMP 17 used in Fig. 5454-18.

Historically, most plotting of parametric master curves has been carried out, using Cartesian coordinates, i.e., with both the property of interest (e.g., stress rupture strength or creep strength) and LMP values on Cartesian coordinates. That was the style used in developing the archival plots included herein, and that focus has been retained throughout most of the book. However, in some instances investigators ﬁnd that plotting the property of interest on a logarithmic scale adds precision in the lower values of the property. The potential value of its use may be seen by a comparison of the Cartesian and semi-logarithmic plots for 5454-O in Fig. 5454-13 and Fig. 5454-21, respectively, in both cases using the value of CLMP of 13.9. In the latter, the strengths at high values of LMP are more precisely deﬁned. However, this may have the effect of providing greater conﬁdence than is justiﬁed in the extrapolated values in that range. It is of interest to see what differences are found in the extrapolation of the stress rupture strengths of 5454-O based on the selection of coordinate systems. Using the comparison referenced previously for Fig. 5454-13 and Fig. 5454-21, with the value of CLMP of 13.9, we ﬁnd the following values of extrapolated stress rupture strength at 10,000 and 100,000 h: Temperature °F

°R

212

672

300

760

400

860

500

960

Desired service rupture life, h

Cartesian plot CLMP = 13.9, ksi

10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000 100,000

18.0 14.0 11.0 10.0 7.2 5.0 4.5 3.4 2.6 2.5 2.0

Semilog plot CLMP = 13.9, ksi

18.0 14.5 11.0 10.0 7.4 5.2 4.7 3.4 2.5 2.5 1.8

10 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys In the case of such well-behaved data as generated for 5454-O, the semi-log plot does indeed seem to provide added precision to the extrapolation, but the values themselves differ very little from the two types of analyses. As we see in the section “Software Programs for Parametric Analyses of Creep Rupture Data,” the semi-logarithmic plotting has been incorporated into some parametric creep analysis software. There is also an opportunity to see the impact when the data generated do not provide as ﬁne a ﬁt as do the data for 5454-O.

Choice of Scales and Precision of Plotting Comparison of the curves in Fig. 1100-3 and 1100-7 also provides an excellent illustration of how important the choices of plotting scales and precision can be. The raw data that went into these two plots are identical, but the differences are rather profound. While the ﬁt in Fig. 1100-3 looks quite reasonable, it is clear from looking at Fig. 1100-7 that the good appearance of Fig. 1100-3 is based on the high level of compression of the ordinate. Figure 1100-7 illustrates that with CLMP = 25.3, the master curve is actually a series of parallel but offset lines for the individual temperatures. This contrasts with the curve for CLMP = 17.4, which can be well represented as a single relationship at these scales. It is interesting to note also that extrapolation with the curve in Fig. 1100-7 for CLMP = 25.3 (see Table 1100-3) provides rather good agreement with the better-ﬁtted curves if the extrapolation is carried out using the individual curves for the temperature of interest and extends it parallel to the higher-temperature curves.

Effect of How the LMP Master Curves are Fitted to the Data The ﬁnal step in creating the master curve in any parametric analysis of any type of data is drawing in the master curve itself. This can be done mathematically, based on least squares representation or a polynomial equation providing best mathematical ﬁt, but that may not provide the best curve for relatively long-time extrapolation, as noted in the discussion of selection of the constant in the parametric equation. Some examples of this are apparent in the master LMP curves for Fig. 2024-3 and 6061-3 for the aluminum alloys 2024-T851 and 6061-T651, respectively. Any calculations based on all of the data points in either case would not have provided the desired effect of bringing the relatively longer-time data into good relationship for extrapolation. Fairing the curve with graphical tools such as French curves is usually the step chosen in the ﬁnal analysis. However, fairing in the perceived best-ﬁt curve is not always an easy change, especially when the variation in the data, such as a single value of the parametric constant, CLMP in this discussion, provides a smooth ﬁt throughout. The investigator must recognize those cases where it is possible to “shade” the master curve one way or the other depending on the weight given individual data points when it is not clear which may be outliers. It is good practice to examine the effect of different renderings of the master curve ﬁt on the extrapolated values.

Applications When Microstructural Changes are Involved As noted earlier, one of the challenges in using the LarsonMiller Parameter (and any other time-temperature parameter as well) is dealing with high-temperature data for an alloy-temper combination that undergoes some type of microstructural transition during high-temperature exposure. Examples would include highly strain-hardened alloys, such as non heat treatable alloy 3003 in the H14 to H18 or H38 tempers (i.e. highly cold worked), or heat treated alloys, such as 2024 or 6061 in the T-type tempers (i.e. heat treated and aged). Once again, there are some useful examples in the datasets included herein, namely, 2024-T851 and 6061-T651. Alloy 2024-T851. As discussed in the section “Effect of LMP Constant (CLMP) Selection,” the isostress calculations included in Table 2024-1 show a fairly dramatic and consistent decrease in CLMP values with increasing temperature and time at temperature, effectively increasing LMP value. As illustrated in the right-hand column of Table 2024-1, at stresses at or above 37 ksi, an average value of 21.8 represents the data well, but at lower stresses, a CLMP value of 16 is indicated; the overall average value is 18.4. This is an illustration of the transition from a precipitation-hardened condition through a severely overaged condition to a near fully annealed and recrystallized condition for 2024, with a significant change in CLMP value associated with the initial and later stages. As illustrated in Fig. 2024-9, the use of the average or lower CLMP values generally results in the best ﬁt for extrapolations involving higher LMP values. Also, as illustrated in the discussion of 2024-T851 in the section “Effect of LMP Constant (CLMP) Selection,” the lower values of CLMP also result in the more conservative and consistent extrapolated stress rupture strengths. Alloy 6061-T651. Thanks to a cooperative program between Alcoa and the Metals Properties Council MPC, now known as the Materials Properties Council, Inc.), the extensive set of data available for 6061-T651 is also available to illustrate this point (Ref 5). Table 6061-1 summarizes the stress rupture strength data from the creep rupture tests of 6061–T651 carried out over the range from 200 through 750 oF, an unusually large range, and in several instances replicate tests were made to identify the degree of data scatter that might be expected. These data are plotted as a function of time at temperature in Fig. 6061-1. The isostress calculations for these data are represented in Table 6061-2. Because of the extensive range of data, an unusually large number of isostress calculations were possible and used. As illustrated in Table 6061-2, a wide range of CLMP values were indicated, and for 6061-T651 as for 2024-T851, there was a transition in the range of values from an average of about 20 (range 17–22) at higher isostresses to around 14 (range 9–18) for lower isostresses, the transition occurring at isostresses of about 6–9 ksi, or around 600 oF. This is consistent with the fact that in this temperature range and above, 6061 would undergo a microstructural transition from the precipitation-hardened condition to that of an annealed condition (effectively going from T6 to O temper). Once again, the challenge in such a situation is the selection of what CLMP value to use. It is also reasonable to try an approach to

Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters / 11 selection of the CLMP value that reﬂects the transition, that is, to calculate the master curve using both the higher and lower CLMP values plus an overall average. From these data for 6061-T651, values of 20.3 and 13.9 were selected for the higher and lower ranges, respectively, and a value of 17.4 for the overall average. The three master plots generated using the three values of CLMP are presented in Fig. 6061-3. Not surprisingly, the quality of the plots in terms of ﬁt to the data varies, with the higher and medium CLMP values illustrating better ﬁt at higher stresses and the lower CLMP value providing better ﬁt at the lower stresses. Actually, the ﬁt with the average CLMP value is reasonably good over the entire range. The next test of the approach becomes to see the effect on the extrapolated values of rupture strength for 6061-T651 for service lives of 10,000 and 100,000 h at various temperatures. The results of the use of the three different CLMP values in extrapolating the stress rupture strengths of 6061-T651 plate are: Temperature °F

°R

212

672

300

760

350

810

400

860

500

960

Desired service rupture life, H

CLMP = 13.9 rupture strength, ksi

CLMP = 17.4 rupture strength, ksi

10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000

35.0 31.0 23.0 16.4 15.5 10.0 10.0 6.5 6.5 4.0

35.0 32.0 24.0 18.0 16.0 12.0 11.0 8.5 8.0 5.0

CLMP = 20.3 rupture strength, ksi

35.5 33.5 25.0 20.0 17.5 14.0 12.5 9.5 8.5 5.5

Several trends are evident:

• • •

Extrapolated rupture strengths at 10,000 and 100,000 h tend to increase with increase in CLMP value. The greatest range observed is for 100,000 h extrapolation at 300 and 350 oF, about 4 ksi; for the 10,000 h extrapolations, the range is usually 2 ksi or less. Use of the average value of CLMP provides about a good estimate of the average extrapolated stress rupture strength.

How to Apply LMP with Microstructural Conditions. These illustrations suggest that despite the fact that microstructural changes take place as aluminum alloys are subjected to a wide range of time-temperatures exposures, and these changes lead to a relatively wide range or shift in CLMP values, the parametric approach to analysis of the data is still potentially useful and may be applied with care. The presence of such transitions does not eliminate the need to get all the help one can in extrapolating to very long service lives; it in fact exaggerates the value of using this additional tool among others that may be available. As noted previously, the greatest challenge in such cases is the decision of which value of CLMP for should be used in the analysis. The examples cited previously provide two most useful options:

•

Place the greatest emphasis on those values reﬂecting the temperature range for which predictions are needed. In other words, use the CLMP value that best ﬁts the region in which the extrapolated values are likely to fall, i.e., the CLMP reﬂecting longer times at the lower temperatures if extrapolations at 150, 212, or 300 oF are involved, and the CLMP reﬂecting the higher

•

temperatures or extremely long times at intermediate temperatures if the extrapolations are at 350 oF or above. Use the average value of CLMP for all extrapolations; generally the variations will be less than ±1 ksi.

Illustrations of Verification and Limitations of LMP It is crucial to be able to characterize the usefulness of parametric extrapolation via LMP or any other in terms of the expected accuracy for long service applications. Yet there is seldom the opportunity to carry out creep rupture tests over the 10 to 20 years needed to judge quantitatively how accurate are extrapolations based on tests carried out for only 100 to 5000 h. Among the steps taken by Alcoa in cooperation with the Materials Properties Council and the Aluminum Association in the 1960s was the conduct of creep rupture tests anticipated to result in rupture lives at or beyond 10,000 h (Ref 13, 15). The tests were carried out at Alcoa Laboratories and at the University of Michigan using carefully controlled procedures and protected surroundings such that the testing machines and strain recording equipment were minimally disturbed throughout the multiyear duration. Several illustrations of the results of these studies are re-examined below, with very interesting and useful results. In each case illustrated, the short-time (<10,000 h rupture life) are analyzed independently using the available isostress calculations to generate a value of CLMP that would have been determined if only those short-life data had been available. Then the long-life data (>10,000 h rupture life are examined to determine the degree to which extrapolation of the short-life data would have accurately predicted the very long-life results.

Alloys 1100-O and H14 Table 1100-4 summarizes the short-life (<10,000 h) rupture strengths for 1100-O and H14, and Tables 1100-5 and 6 present the isostress calculations based on those short-life data for 1100-O and H14, respectively. With the exception of two apparent outliers for the O temper associated with one test a 300 oF, a value of CLMP = 18.2 is strongly indicated for both tempers. That value was used to calculate the LMP values in Table 1100-7, and the master curves in Fig. 1100-7 (O temper) and 1100-8 (H14 temper) were generated. For 1100-O, the long-life data (>10,000 h rupture life) are presented in Table 1100-8. Also included in the second block of columns in Table 1100-8 are the LMP values and the extrapolated stress rupture strengths for the observed long-time test results derived from the curve in Fig. 1100-7 that was based on only the short-life data and CLMP = 18.2. The very long time extrapolated rupture strengths for 1100-O are in extremely good agreement with the actual stress rupture lives. To the precision available at the scales used, the extrapolated values were essentially equal to the original test values. In the worst cases, the predicted stress rupture strengths were within ±1 ksi (±7 MPa). It is useful to note that 1100-O represents a material that was annealed, i.e., fully recrystallized prior to any testing, and so it would not undergo any signiﬁcant microstructural changes during the span of time-temperature tests, even at very high temperatures.

12 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Therefore, to explore the degree to which short-life data extrapolations for a strain-hardened temper of 1100 would correctly predict long-life test results, parallel sets of calculations were performed for 1100-H14. The short-life data are presented in Table 1100-5, the isostress calculations in Table 1100-6, and the master LMP curve based on the calculated CLMP = 18.2 is presented in Fig. 1100-8. The long-life data for 1100-H14 are summarized in Table 1100-9, along with the extrapolated values. In this case, there was perfect agreement between actual test stresses and extrapolated rupture strengths. Thus, for moderately strain-hardened aluminum alloys as well as annealed aluminum alloys it appears that the LMP approach to extrapolation is rather reliable.

Alloy 5454-O The fairly extensive data set for stress rupture strength of 5454-O in Table 5454-3 offers another opportunity to check the ability to project long-life rupture strengths from relatively short-life test results. In Table 5454-6, the data from stress rupture tests lasting less than 5000 h were used to generate the constant CLMP for the LMP; it was 13.5, compared to the value of 14.3 used in the archival analysis or 13.9 in a more recent analysis. In the lower part of Table 5454-6, the results of stress rupture test lasting 10,000 h or more are summarized, along with the values that would have been predicted for stress rupture strength by extrapolation using the LMP analysis generated solely from the short-time tests. The analysis is complicated a bit by the fact that about half of the long-life tests were discontinued before failure was obtained. As might have been expected, given the small variation in CLMP value (13.5 versus 13.9 or 14.3), there is generally very good agreement between the actual and predicted long-life stress rupture strengths, often less than ±1 ksi. The principal exception was the stress rupture life at 20 ksi, for which the extrapolations with all three values of CLMP were about 17 ksi. This suggests that the test result for 20 ksi was an outlier, not representative of the majority of the data. That assumption is supported by the fact that the test result for 20 ksi at 212 oF was much longer than the comparable values at 300 and 400 oF based on their LMP values. Incidentally, it appears from the analysis that most of the tests that were discontinued were relatively close to failure lives, that is, of course, on a logarithmic scale, so several thousand more hours might have been involved.

Alloy 6061-T651 As illustrated in the section “Factors Affecting Usefulness of LMP,” alloy 6061-T651, for which data are shown is one of many aluminum alloys and tempers that would be expected to undergo some microstructural change over the range of time-temperature test conditions. Fortunately, the planners of the creep rupture program referenced here (Ref 13, 15) considered these factors and planned tests to determine the stress rupture strengths for lives greater than 10,000 h. Table 6061–1 includes those long-time test results, along with LMP calculations for the three values of CLMP derived from the data considering the lower and higher test temperatures and the overall average value. Some of the long-time tests were discontinued for some reason, and these are included with the appropriate indicators.

For purposes of this study, values of CLMP were calculated using only the stress rupture lives from tests in which the time to rupture was less that 10,000 h. LMP master curves were generated using only the short-life data (<10,000 h) and are presented in Fig. 60613 utilizing the three values of CLMP associated primarily with lowtemperature test, high-temperature tests, and the overall average. Table 6061-6 includes the extrapolated stresses from each of the three LMP master curves obtained using the LMP values CLMP associated with the long-time stress rupture life values. Comparison of the values in the Test Stress column (the third column) with the three Extrapolated Stress columns provides an indication of the degree of consistency between actual test results and extrapolations based on the shorter life data (mostly less than 1000 h). Actually a remarkable degree of agreement is found, seldom more than 1 ksi disagreement, and perhaps the best agreement is with the LMP master curve generated with the overall average values CLMP. These results in general would indicate that the LMP approach has some value as an indicator of long-time life expectations even in situations where transitions in microstructure may occur over the course of time-temperature conditions in the tests.

Limitations of Parametric Analyses The principal limitations of parametric analyses of creep rupture data are of four types:

• • • •

Insufficient raw data to generate adequate isostress calculations for CLMP Problems with compressed scale plotting The tendency to extrapolate the extrapolation Difficulties in getting a suitable ﬁt for the parametric relationship involved with the raw data

These are each discussed brieﬂy below using the LMP analyses to illustrate the points. Limitation 1: Insufficient Raw Data to Generate Adequate Isostress Calculations for CLMP. As described in the illustrations of how to carry out parametric analyses in the sections “Rate Process Theory and the Development of Parametric Relationships” and “Illustrative Applications of LMP, MHP, and DSP,” the ﬁrst requirement is for adequate data to carry out isostress calculations to generate constants for the equations, CLMP in the case of LMP. The most useful isostress calculations result from tests at the same creep rupture stress at two or more different temperatures. However, the same effect can be obtained by having overlapping test stresses at different temperatures so that isostress value may be judged by interpolation of data at two different stresses. The optimum situation is to have multiple opportunities across the whole temperature range over which tests were made, sufficient to see if a single value or narrow range of values will provide a good ﬁt for much of the data. The inability to make at least such calculations can lead to difﬁculties in moving forward with the analysis. In that event, the appropriate ﬁrst step would be to try the nominal value of CLMP = 20 as suggested in the original analysis by Larson and Miller. In general, the values of CLMP for creep and stress rupture data for aluminum alloys range from 13 to 17, so the value of 20 will provide a good ﬁrst step.

Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters / 13 After the master LMP curve for CLMP = 20 has been generated, it is relatively easy to judge whether a higher or lower value of CLMP would improve the ﬁt. Reference to Fig. 1100-7 provides some guidance in this respect:

•

•

If data for individual temperatures are more right-to-left in position as test temperature increases, as for CLMP = 13.9 in Fig. 1100-7, the value of CLMP is too low and a higher value should be tried. If data for individual temperatures are more left-to-right in position as test temperature increases, as for CLMP = 25.3 in Fig. 1100-7, the value of CLMP is too high and a lower value should be tried.

Limitation 2: Problems with Compressed Scale Plotting. As noted in the section “Factors Affecting Usefulness of LMP,” among the variables inﬂuencing the precision and accuracy of LMP analyses is the scale of plotting the test results. Plotting on relatively compressed scales for either creep or stress rupture strengths or for the LMP values themselves will have the effect of minimizing scatter in the plot, possibly obscuring the fact that the ﬁt of the raw data is not very good. This tendency of compressing the scatter may give the incorrect impression that good ﬁt has been achieved and introduce more variability in any extrapolated values than desired. To maximize the value of the analysis, it is best to use as expanded scales as possible given the range of test results and LMP values, giving the best opportunity to recognize temperature-totemperature variations. Limitation 3: The Tendency to Extrapolate the Extrapolation. The principal purpose of the development of a master curve is to permit extrapolations of raw data to time-temperature combinations not represented by the raw data themselves. With a good ﬁt of the data, there is good evidence that is a reasonable thing to do. What is not recommended is to extrapolate beyond the limits of the master curve itself, at least not signiﬁcantly. To do so places the investigator in a position where there are no data to support the extrapolation, and one may miss a gradual positive or negative change in slope of the extrapolated curve. Limitation 4: Difficulties in Getting a Suitable Fit for the Parametric Relationship Involved with the Raw Data. As noted in several points discussed previously, the principal challenge in developing LMP master curves or any other type of master plot, is the generation of suitable constants for the parametric relationship, CLMP for the LMP function. While in some cases, reasonably uniform values will be generated from isostress calculations (see Table 5454-7), in other cases rather divergent values may be found (see Table 6061-2). Even in such cases, there often is a pattern that can be used to judge the most useful value of CLMP. In the case of 6061-T651, it was found that the overall average handled the data quite well in general, as illustrated in Fig. 6061-3. In other cases, it may not be so clear. Experience has shown that when it is difficult to establish a good average value of CLMP that ﬁts all of the data well, it is best to bias the value of constant to best ﬁt the longer-time data at several test temperatures. This is especially true when the principal purpose of the master curve is to extrapolate to longer times at the

individual temperatures, so the master curve is best based on data representing the longest times and highest temperatures involved. Figure 6061-3 is also a good illustration of that point. In cases where the extrapolations of principal interest are those at the lowest temperatures, say 150 to 212 oF (65 to 100 oC), it is probably best to use a value of CLMP generated from that range of temperatures if it differs much from the overall average value.

Presentation of Archival Master LMP Curves Representative archival LMP master curves for the stress rupture strengths and, where available, the creep strengths at 0.1%, 0.2%, 0.5%, and 1% creep strain for the alloys and tempers are presented in the Data Sets at the end of this book. Those master curves referred to as “archival” are from Alcoa’s archives and are presented here as derived by Alcoa research personnel: principally, Robert C. Malcolm III and Kenneth O. Bogardus, under the management of Alcoa Laboratories division chiefs Francis M. Howell, Marshall Holt, and J. Gilbert Kaufman. This is the group of Alcoa experts, most notably Malcolm, Bogardus, and Holt, who did much of the original analysis leading to the creep design values for aluminum alloys used in publications such as the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code (Ref 15). The majority of all of the calculations were performed by Malcolm, a heroic task in the days before desktop computers and Lotus or Excel software. It is appropriate to note that all creep rupture testing for which data are presented herein were carried out strictly in accordance with ASTM E 139, “Standard Method of Conducting Creep, Creep Rupture, and Stress Rupture Tests of Metallic Materials,” Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Part 03.01. Wrought Alloys

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

1100-O, H14, H18: stress rupture strength and, for the O temper, creep strengths 2024-T851: stress rupture strength 2219-T6, T851: stress rupture strength 3003-O, H12, H14, H18: stress rupture strength 3004-O, H34, H38: stress rupture strength 5050-O: stress rupture strength 5052-O, H32, H34, H38: stress rupture strength 5052-H112, as-welded with 5052 ﬁller alloy: stress rupture strength 5083-H321, as-welded with 5083 ﬁller alloy: stress rupture strength 5154-O: stress rupture strengths 5454-O, H34, as-welded H34: stress rupture strength and, for the O temper, strength at minimum creep rate 5456-H321, as-welded with 5556 ﬁller alloy: stress rupture strength 6061-T6 and T651: stress rupture strength, creep strengths, and strength at minimum creep rate 6061-T651, as-welded with 4043 ﬁller alloy: stress rupture strength 6061-T651, heat treated and aged after welding with 4043: stress rupture strength

14 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

• •

6061-T651, as-welded with 5356 ﬁller alloy: stress rupture strength 6063-T5 and T6: strength at minimum creep rate

Casting Alloys

• • • • •

224.0-T62: stress rupture strength 249.0-T62: stress rupture strength 270.0-T6: 0.2% creep strength 354.0-T6: stress rupture strength C355.0-T6: stress rupture strength

Where possible, the more signiﬁcant sets of raw data used in the parametric analyses, especially for stress rupture strength, are also presented herein. It is important to recognize that data other than the tabular data presented here were also likely to have been considered in the ﬁnal decisions about design values for any purposes (Ref 14), and the data presented herein should be considered representative of the alloys and tempers but not the sole source of information for any statistical or design application. As noted earlier, in presenting the LMP master curves, the term “archival” is used in the titles when the curves being presented are reproductions of the results of the original analyses by the Alcoa Laboratories experts noted previously. In these presentations, the precision of the values shown for the LMP constant CLMP are those used by the original experimenters and analysts; in some cases these are round numbers (e.g., 19 or 20), while in others as much as three decimal places (e.g., 17.751) are used. Generally, the calculations on which the original values of CLMP were based are no longer available, and it should be recognized that new investigators using the same data might elect to utilize different values of CLMP. Also included with the archival curves for the alloys and tempers listed previously are some current LMP parametric plots made by the author using the archival raw data to illustrate some points about the usefulness and limitations of parametric analyses. Those curves are not referred to as “archival.” Those too should be considered as representative of the respective alloys, not of any statistical or design caliber. As noted previously, the English/engineering system of units is given greater prominence in the tabular and graphical presentations herein because all of these data and the archival plots were generated in that system. For those interested in more information of the use of SI/metric units in parametric analysis, reference is made to Appendix 4.

Granta’s MI:Lab is a sophisticated material property data storage, analysis, and reporting program developed by Granta Design, Ltd. of Cambridge, England. Its application modules include tension, compression, relaxation, fracture toughness, and fatigue crack propagation in addition to creep and stress rupture data, the focus of this discussion. It encompasses statistics and graphics among its analytical tools and incorporates database components suitable for all structural materials including composites. Focusing on the creep and stress rupture capability of Granta MI:Lab, Fig. 2 illustrates which components of the system would be employed, looking at the opening screen of the program. The creep test data are put into the database, and the data are analyzed with the statistical programs with output to the creep summary builder. Users have the ability to use either the Larson-Miller Parameter (LMP) or hyperbolic tangent ﬁtting as models for analysis. For purposes of this volume, focus is given in the following information to the LMP option. In order to illustrate the application of this program to actual data for an aluminum alloy, data for 2219-T6 forgings, heat treated and aged at 420 °F, from Ref 17 were put through a representative analysis in the MI:Lab creep module. While the data in Ref 17 are not raw test data, but rather typical values gleaned by analysis of many individual test results as described previously in this volume, the usefulness of the evaluation is clear. To start the process, the stress rupture data for 2219-T6 forgings from Ref 17 were imported via Excel spreadsheet to the MI:Lab module from the ASM Alloy Center on the ASM International website (Ref 18). These same values are shown in Table 2219-1. The individual doing the analysis has several decisions to make to begin the process, including (a) which model to use, LMP or hyperbolic tangent (tanh), (b) which creep rupture variable to use, in this case, stress at time to rupture, or stress rupture strength; (c) which CLMP value (called K in this software) to use, and (d) the number of terms desired in the polynomial equation for the ﬁt. Once these variables are set, the program proceeds with the analysis and provides the user with the summary presentation of the information illustrated in Fig. 3. That summary includes:

• • • •

Software Programs for Parametric Analyses of Creep Rupture Data While the availability of spreadsheet software programs such as Excel make the calculations involved in the application of parametric analyses such as the LMP to creep rupture data much more efficient and effective than before such programs were available, there have been some signiﬁcantly greater strides made in this area more recently. A speciﬁc example chosen to illustrate this capability is the Granta MI program module known as the “Creep Data Summary” within the MI:Lab database program (Ref 16).

On the right is a summary of the numeric results of the analysis for the CLMP. Upper left shows plots of the stress rupture strength data for each temperature as a function of time to rupture. Lower left shows plots of the LMP (called K in the program) for each temperature as a function of rupture life. In the center is the resultant master LMP curve, both average best ﬁt parabolic equation with the requested number of terms, and minimum, based on the safety factor the user prescribes. Note that the Granta MI:Lab software presents the LMP master curve in semi-log coordinates, as discussed in the section “Choice of Cartesian versus Semi-log Plotting,” and the units used in the software are SI/metric.

This ﬁnal semi-log LMP master curve from the Granta MI:Lab software is also presented on a larger scale as Fig. 2219-2. Here the ﬁrst of two limitations to this software are noted, as the scales and lack of intermediate scale division lines make interpolation within the plot to any great precision rather difficult. The software

Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters / 15

Fig. 2

Initial computer screen of Granta MI:Lab Database Software System, introducing components of the Creep Summary Module

output would be better served to include a larger-scale plot with ﬁner scale division. For comparison, the short-time (up to 1000 h rupture life) stress rupture data from which this plot was generated are summarized in Table 2219-2, and isostress calculations were made to determine if a better ﬁt might be obtained with a value of CLMP other than the 20 used arbitrarily in the MI:Lab analysis. It is interesting to note that isostress analysis of the archival data for 2219-T6 forgings in Table 2219-2 led to an average CLMP value of 24.7 rather than the nominal value of 20 selected for the MI:Lab analysis. This illustrates the second shortcoming of the MI:Lab creep software, as it would be a valuable enhancement to users for the software to make the isostress calculations as part of the analysis and draw the master curve with an optimized value rather than rely on the investigator’s judgment or separate analysis. As an added comparison, Fig. 2219-3 includes semi-log master curve plots for values of CLMP of both 20 and 24.7. While the overall ﬁt is clearly better with the higher value of CLMP, it is also clear that neither takes very well into account the shorter-time tests at 700 °F. This is a good illustration of the point made in the section “Choice of Cartesian versus Semi-log Plotting” of how extrapolated values will be impacted by the way the master curve is drawn in areas where several options are suggested by individual data points. In the case of Fig. 2219-3, giving greater weight to the 700 °F data will lead to more conservative (i.e., lower) extrapolated values in this region of the curves.

A Cartesian master curve for 2219-T6 forgings was also generated using a CLMP value of 25 (rounded from the calculated average of 24.7 from the isostress calculation) and is presented in Fig. 2219-4. A comparison of the extrapolated 10,000 and 100,000 h stress rupture strengths based on the two semi-log plots (Fig. 22193) and the Cartesian plot (Fig. 2219-4) is shown in the lower part of Table 2219-2; overall there are generally only small differences. In summary, software systems such as Granta MI:Lab are available to aid investigators in their parametric analyses of properties such a creep and stress rupture strengths. Investigators need to be aware of the strengths and limitations of such software and apply their own judgment to the output. In addition, the illustration here using stress rupture data for 2219-T6 forgings seems to support the discussion in the section “Choice of Cartesian versus Semi-log Plotting” that semi-log plotting of master parametric curves does not seem to add appreciably to the consistency or precision of the extrapolation.

Application of LMP to Comparisons of Stress Rupture Strengths of Alloys, Tempers, and Products While LMP analyses are usually aimed at the optimization of extrapolation for a speciﬁc alloy and temper, they can also be useful for comparing the performance of different tempers, products,

16 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 3

Creep Summary Module presentation of stress rupture data and LMP master curve for 2219-T6 forging

or conditions of a given alloy, or for comparisons of different alloys. Several examples of such applications are described below and included in the data sets to illustrate the following types of comparisons:

In cases where it proves difficult or impossible to ﬁnd suitable value of CLMP to ﬁt the multiple sets of data for which a comparison is being attempted, it is probably best to abandon this approach and use direct strength-life plots at individual temperatures of interest.

• Different tempers of the same alloy Different products of the same alloy and temper Parent metal and welds of compatible ﬁller alloys As-welded condition and heat treated and aged after welding Different alloys

Comparisons of Stress Rupture Strengths of Different Tempers of an Alloy

• • • •

The critical difference between analyzing any type of numerical data using LMP or any of the other parametric relationships is the approach to the calculation of the constant for the Larson-Miller parameter, CLMP. In analyzing data for a given alloy, temper, and product, the challenge is to determine the value of CLMP that provides the best ﬁt of all of the available data for that particular material. On the other hand, in preparing for comparisons of any two or more sets of data for different lots, alloys, tempers, or conditions, the challenge is to determine a value of CLMP that adequately ﬁts both or all of the several sets involved. As a result, in the latter case, it may sometimes be necessary to use a less-than-optimal value of CLMP for one or more of the individual materials included in the comparison, but one that provides sufficiently good ﬁt for the multiple sets involved and so provides a useful comparison.

Several opportunities exist within the archival data to compare the stress rupture strengths of two or more tempers of a single alloy. Figure 1100-9—Comparison of 1100-O and H14. As one would expect, the LMP master curves for 1100-O and 1100-H14 converge rather smoothly at parameter values equivalent to relatively short times at 600 oF or higher and relatively long times at lower temperatures. This is associated with the gradual annealing of the 1100-H14. It is clear, however, that the H14 temper offers considerable advantage in stress rupture strength over the O temper over much of the range. Figure 3003-12—Comparison of 3003-O, H12, H14, and H18. While the data for individual tempers of 3003 suggested slightly different “best” values of CLMP, ranging from about 15 to 20 (Table 3003-2), a value of 16.6) optimum for the O temper provided a reasonable average for the group, leading to the comparisons in Fig. 3003-12. Overall, as expected, 1100-H18 showed the superior relationship. Interestingly, there was little difference in the parametric relationships for the H12 and H14 tempers, but both

Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters / 17 were signiﬁcantly superior to the O temper and about midway between the O and H18 tempers. As expected the relationships for all four tempers converged at time-temperature conditions consistent with annealing of the strain-hardened tempers. Figure 3004-4—Comparison of 3004-O, H34, and H38. As for 3003, the relationships for various tempers of 3004 suggested somewhat different optimal values of CLMP, but a value of 20 provided suitable data ﬁt and a useful comparison for all of the tempers, as in Fig. 3004-4. The comparison of 3004-O, H34, and H38 differed somewhat from the other comparisons, however, in that the relationships for the three tempers converged at lower timetemperature combinations, and there was signiﬁcant advantage of the H34 and H38 tempers over the O temper for a relatively narrower range. This suggests that perhaps the lot of 3004-O for which data were used in this study was not fully annealed to begin with and through the test program underwent additional recrystallization and softening. Figure 5052-5—Comparison of 5052-O, H32, H34, and H38. A value of CLMP of 16.0 appeared to reasonably characterize most 5052 data, and Fig. 5052-5 was generated with that constant. Signiﬁcant advantages for the strain-hardened tempers existed only at relatively moderate time-temperature combinations, with convergence of the curves occurring at mid-range of the data. In this instance there was little advantage for the H38 temper over the H34 temper under any condition, but both showed some advantage over the H32 and, of course, the O temper. Figure 5454-20—Comparison of 5454-O and H34. Figure 5454-20 shows the LMP master curve for 5454-O and H34 based on the same value of CLMP as used for the O temper (CLMP =14.3). As would be expected, the master curve and individual data points for the H34 temper blend into the original curve for the O temper as the LMP value increases, though the difference is not signiﬁcant except at lower test temperatures. Figure 6061-5—Comparison of 6061-O and T6. As with strain-hardened tempers, the master parametric curves for stress rupture strength for T6-type tempers will converge with those for the O temper as the time-temperature exposure increases. This is illustrated for 6061-T6 in Fig. 6061-5, as beyond LMP values of about 24,000, equivalent to exposures at 600 oF and above, the two curves are coincident. Figure 6063-3—Comparison of 6063-T5 and T6. In the case of 6063, the T5 temper refers to extruded shapes that are solution heat treated and air or water quenched directly from the extrusion press, while the T6 temper is intended to designate those extruded shapes which, following extrusion, are given a separate furnace heat treatment and subsequently water quenched before aging. As illustrated in Fig. 6063-3, the T6 temper has consistently higher strengths at minimum creep rate than those of the T5 temper, as would be expected given the higher-quality heat treatment.

Comparisons of Stress Rupture Strengths of Different Products of an Alloy Figure 6061-4—Comparison of 6061-T651 Plate and 6061-T6 Sheet and Rod. Figure 6061-4 illustrates that there can be signiﬁcant differences in the stress rupture strengths of different products of some alloys. When all plotted together with a

LMP constant, CLMP, of 20.3, the stress rupture strengths of 0.064 to 0.125 in thick sheet and 3/4 in. diam rolled and drawn rod were consistently higher than those of 1 to 11/2 in. thick 6061-T651 plate. The differences were as much as about 10 ksi at the maximum, and even at very high temperatures modest differences persisted. This magnitude of effect is unexpected since the sheet and rod would likely recrystallize more than thicker plate, usually leading to lower static strengths at room temperature.

Comparisons of Stress Rupture Strengths of Welds with Parent Alloys Figure 5052-9—Comparison of 5052 Welds in 5052-H112 Plate with Various Tempers of 5052. The stress rupture strengths of 5052 welds in 5052-H112 plate, tested as-welded, appear from Fig. 5052-9, plotted with a CLMP of 16, to be about the same as those of 5052-H32 over the lower-temperature range. In the higher-temperature, longer-exposure time range, the rupture strengths actually seem modestly higher than those of 5052 plate in various tempers, but this is probably a reﬂection of lot-to-lot variations more than any reliable trend. It does give conﬁdence that the rupture strengths of welds would be at least as high as those of the parent metal over much of the higher LMP range. Figure 5454-20—Comparison of 5554 Welds in 5454-H32 Plate with Various Tempers of 5454. Plotted in Fig. 5454-20 along with data for 5454-O and H34, the stress rupture strengths of 5554 welds in 5454-H32 plate fall very close to the relationship for 5454-O. This is as would be expected because of the softening in the weld zone resulting from the melting and resolidiﬁcation of the weld metal, plus the adjacent softening in the heat-affected zone. Figure 6061-27—Comparison of 6061-T651 Plate and 4043 Welds in 6061-T651 Plate. The stress rupture strengths of 4043 welds in 6061-T651 are largely inferior to those of the parent metal 6061-T651 plate itself, as illustrated in Fig. 6061-27. Those curves are plotted using CLMP of 17.4, less than optimal for the 4043 welds, but it is nevertheless clear that as-welded 4043 joints have signiﬁcantly lower strengths than the parent plate, with some difference (2–3 ksi) existing even to relatively high temperatures. Figure 6061-28—Comparison of 4043 Welds in 6061-T651 Plate, As-Welded and Heat Treated and Aged after Welding. Heat treating and artiﬁcially aging 4043 welds in 6061-T651 plate appears from the data in Fig. 6061-28 to only modestly improve the stress rupture strength of the joints, and that effect appears signiﬁcant only to relatively modest temperatures. The stress rupture strengths of the heat treated 4043 welds still fall signiﬁcantly below those of the parent 6061-T651 plate. Figure 6061-29—Comparison of 4043 and 5356 Welds in 6061-T651 Plate. No optimum value of CLMP could be established permitting a completely satisfactory comparison of 4043 and 5154 welds in 6061-T651 plate; a value of CLMP = 20.3 provided the relationships in Fig. 6061-29. In this chart, welds made with 5154 ﬁller alloy appear signiﬁcantly superior in stress rupture strength to those of 4043 welds when tested at lower temperatures, but as temperature and time at temperature increase, the advantage seems to shift to the 4043 welds. At the highest temperature for which data are available for 5154 welds, 550 oF, the advantage for 4043 welds was about 2 ksi, more than 25%.

18 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Comparisons of Different Alloys Figure 6061-30—Comparison of 6061-T651 and 5454-H34 plate. A reasonable comparison of interest to designers may be whether or not to use 6061-T651 plate or 5454-H34 plate for some type of tankage that requires sustained high-temperature loading. While the optimal CLMP for the two alloys and tempers were not identical, a value of CLMP of 16 provided reasonably good comparisons and was used in producing Fig. 6061-30. As illustrated in that ﬁgure, alloy 6061-T651 maintains a signiﬁcant margin of higher performance over most of the high-temperature range. Figure 5456-7—Comparison of Stress Rupture Strengths of Welds in 5052, 5083, and 5456. A value of CLMP of 15 provided reasonable parametric relationships for 5052 welds in 5052 plate, 5183 welds in 5083 plate and 5556 welds in 5456 plate and so was used to produce Fig. 5456-7. As shown there, the stress rupture strengths of 5183 welds in 5083 and 5556 welds in 5456 are about equal over the entire range, not surprising given the close agreement in chemical compositions of these alloys. The stress rupture strengths of 5052 welds in 5052 plate were signiﬁcantly lower up to LMP values of about 14,000, but at more severe time-temperature combinations leading to higher LMP values there was little difference among the stress rupture strengths of the three ﬁller alloys. The ±1 ksi differences would not be considered statistically signiﬁcant without conﬁrmation from much more extensive testing.

Application of LMP to High-Temperature Tensile Data for Aluminum Alloys While the application of the Larson-Miller Parameter and timetemperature parameters to creep data, including rupture life and times to develop speciﬁc amounts of creep strain (i.e., 0.1%, 0.2%, 1%, etc.), is fairly widespread, little use is generally made of the parameters in analyzing other types of high-temperature data for aluminum alloys. One obvious example of other high-temperature data to which the parameters might be applied is the tensile properties of aluminum alloys at temperatures above room temperature. For aluminum alloys, both the temperature and the time of exposure at temperature affect the resultant values, and the effects of time at temperature are cumulative if the exposure is alternating. As a result, graphical presentations of such data usually include a family of curves, presenting either tensile ultimate and tensile yield strengths as a function of temperature with a family of curves for different exposure time, e.g., 100, 1000, and 10,000 h, or those properties as a function of exposure time with a family of curves for each temperature. Illustrative examples of the two typical modes of graphical presentation are shown for the tensile strength and tensile yield strength of 5456-H321 in Fig. 5456-3 and 5456-4, respectively. Since a family of curves is involved in each type of graphical presentation, a systematic means of consolidating the properties into a single continuous master curve would be of value, especially for extrapolation purposes, as with creep data. Even before attempting such analyses, it is apparent from the plots in Fig. 5456-3 and 5456-4 that the parametric approach may

not prove useful throughout the whole range of exposure temperatures. That is primarily because, at relatively low temperatures (up to ~212 oF (100 oC) and at relatively higher temperatures especially (above 450 oF, or 235 oC), the properties do not vary with exposure time. It is not clear, for example, that long-time exposure at 500 oF (260 oC) will ever result in strengths as low as exposure even for short times at 600 oF (315 oC). Nevertheless, in the midrange of temperatures, there is reason to believe that the parametric approach may be fruitful. Based on isostress calculations of the data in Fig. 5456-3 and 5456-4, which led to quite a wide range for CLMP (~28–65), values of 54 and 46 were chosen for tensile strength and yield strength, respectively. The calculations of CLMP led to the LMP master curves in Fig. 5456-5 and 5456-6 for tensile strength and yield strength, respectively. The master curves for tensile strength (Fig. 5456-5) and tensile yield strength (Fig. 5456-6) look remarkably uniform and are consistent with most data points for intermediate temperatures; as expected based on the previous observations, the major exceptions were those for the relatively low and very high temperatures. It would appear that for the intermediate temperatures at least, the LMP may be a useful tool for long-exposure extrapolation, but that it must be used with caution, and with careful comparisons with other graphical means of extrapolations.

Application of LMP to Microstructural Changes and Corrosion Performance While there has been little published on the application of parameters such as LMP to project likely microstructural changes, the usefulness of the parameters in extrapolating creep and rupture life data provide some basis for the logic that what is really being forecast are changes in microstructure. In a recent study at Secat, Inc. (Ref 16), the authors made a useful study of that potential. The potential value of such an approach is illustrated by the experience by the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard in which ships stationed for years in equatorial environments are subjected to endless hours of on-deck temperatures approaching 150 oF (65 oC). In battle zones, high-temperature exposures are aggravated by temperature increases from gun turrets ﬁring at regular intervals. The net result may be the equivalent of 20 to 30 years of exposure to temperatures averaging 150 oF (65 oC). Some aluminum alloys thought to be resistant to intergranular corrosion attack have experienced failures as a result of such exposures. Aluminum-magnesium alloys containing more than 3% Mg, such as 5456-H321, were widely used in ship superstructures before about 1980 and experienced the type of failure described above. Such exposures resulted in a gradual buildup of the magnesiumbearing beta-phase precipitates along the grain boundaries of such alloys, in turn making them susceptible to grain boundary corrosion and exfoliation attack after many years of service (Ref 20). Around 1980, a new temper was developed for high-magnesiumbearing aluminum alloys, the H116 temper that was considered much more resistant to such equatorial marine exposures and easily met the requirements of applicable ASTM Standard Test

Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters / 19 Methods such as G 66 (Ref 21) and G 67 (Ref 22), and the requirement for marine alloy plate in ASTM Standard B 928 (Ref 23). However, in recent years, more evidence of continued failures has been found. As a result, there is a need for a more reliable means to predict the performance effects of many years of exposure on the corrosion performance of aluminum alloys. The use of LMP to project potential microstructural changes indicative of such susceptibility appears to offer a means to achieve this. In the initial study (Ref 16), the value of CLMP of 20 recommended by Larson and Miller and broadly supported in creep testing on Al-Mg alloys was selected to determine short-term exposures that might predict the microstructural conditions after 30 years of exposure at 150 oF (65 oC). Using LMP, the exposure of about 30 years (e.g., 250,000 h) at 150 oF (610 oR; 65 oC) becomes: LMP = 610(20 + log 250,000) = 610 × 25.383 = 15,483

For an equivalent rapid-response test to be complete in 4 h, the exposure temperature must be: 15,483/(20 + log 4) = 15,483/20.598 = 752 oR or 292 oF (144 oC)

For an equivalent rapid-response test to be complete in 4 days (96 h), the exposure temperature must be:

or 96 h at 245 oF (118 oC) may be useful in predicting the effect of marine service exposures of 30 years at temperatures up to 150 oF (65 oC). The results of the preliminary tests to explore this approach are illustrated by the micrographs in Fig. 4. Included is the microstructure 1 of 4 in. thick commercially produced 5456-H116 as produced and the microstructure after exposures of 4 and 96 h exposures at 292 oF (144 oC) and 245 oF (117 oC), respectively. The as-produced 5456-H116 shows some precipitation, but not concentrated along the grain boundaries where it would likely lead to grain-boundary corrosion attack. On the other hand, after exposure simulating 30 years at 150 oF (65 oC) per LMP analysis, there is continuous grain-boundary precipitation of the beta phase, indicating a high likelihood of some corrosion attack by either exfoliation or stress-corrosion cracking on those grain boundaries. Thus, the LMP approach to simulating long-life service exposures on the microstructures of aluminum alloys appears to be preliminarily validated. It appears that one step to usefully extend this study is to explore the use of a value of CLMP more closely associated with tensile properties at temperatures closer to those in the microstructural study of interest, namely from 150 to 350 oF (65 175 oC). These considerations lead to values of CLMP around 50 rather than 20, providing the following simulations of 30 years at 150 oF (65 oF ):

15,483/(20 + log 96) = 15,483/21.976 = 705 R or 245 F (118 C)

The critical LMP value: LMP = 610(50 + log 250,000) = 610 × 55.383 = 33,783

These calculations utilizing the LMP suggested that relatively short-time experimental exposures of either 4 h at 292 oF (144 oC)

Therefore, for a 4 h test: 33,783/(50 + log 4) = 33,783/50.598 = 668 oR or 208 oF (98 oC)

o

Fig. 4

o

o

Microstructure of 5456-H161 as-fabricated and following LMP simulation of 30 years of exposure at 150 oF

20 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys And for a 4 day test: 33,783/(50 + log 96) = 33,783/51.976 = 650 oR or 190 oF (87 oC)

Examinations of microstructures of 5456-H116 plate after exposure to these short-time test periods also illustrated the grainboundary buildup. Obviously, it will take many years to prove conclusively whether this approach is accurate and reliable. Nevertheless, in the short term, it offers a means of estimating microstructural changes as a result of high-temperature exposures that mighty otherwise be completely unpredictable.

Conclusions The usefulness of the parametric relationships such as the LarsonMiller Parameter (LMP) for the analysis and extrapolation of hightemperature data for aluminum alloys has been described herein, noting its considerable value for creep and stress rupture strength projections. Illustrations have been provided of the relatively good accuracy in using the Larson-Miller Parameter to project creep strengths from data obtained in relatively short-term tests (<10,000 h) to rupture lives as great as 1 × 106 h where actual long-term testing was carried out to verify the extrapolations. Some limitations that must be recognized in using time-temperature parametric relationships have also been illustrated. While master parametric representations of creep and stress rupture data for aluminum alloys in tempers that do not undergo much microstructural change under the scope of conditions in the testing are very uniform and represent the data quite well, the same may not always be true for alloys in highly cold-worked or solution heat treated tempers. In the latter case, considerable care must be taken to obtain sufficiently representative data over as wide a range of test conditions as possible and considerable judgment is required in selection of the appropriate constant for the parametric relationship (CLMP for the Larson-Miller Parameter). About 100 archival Larson-Miller Parametric master curves originally developed for aluminum alloys at Alcoa Laboratories are included in this publication with Alcoa, Inc. permission. These are illustrative examples typical and representative of the respective alloys and tempers, but have no statistical basis and therefore are not to be considered as the basis for design. An example of the application of LMP to the tensile properties of one alloy (5456-H321) has also been illustrated, indicating its limitations at relatively low temperatures (near room temperature up to ~212 oF, or 100 oC) or at very high temperatures (at or above 500 oF, or 260 oC), but its potential value at intermediate temperatures, say 212 to 450 oF (~100 to 230 oC). An illustration has also been provided that parametric relationships such as LMP may be used to develop simulations of the possible effects of very long high-temperature service on the microstructure of aluminum alloys by deﬁning what relatively short-term exposures might best project such changes. An example illustrating the ability to project the possible sensitization of 5456-H321 to intergranular corrosion attack after many years of service exposure at temperatures in the range of 150 oF (65 oC) has also been presented.

REFERENCES 1. H. Eyring, Viscosity, Plasticity, and Diffusion as Examples of Absolute Reaction Rates, J. Chem Phys., Vol 4, 1936, p 283 2. W. Kauzmann, Flow of Solid Metals from the Standpoint of Chemical Rate Theory, Trans. AIME, Vol 143, 1941, p 57 3. S. Dushmann, L.W. Dunbar, and H. Huthsteiner, Creep of Metals, J. Appl. Phys., Vol 18, 1944, p 386 4. J.C. Fisher and C.W. McGregor, Tension Tests at Constant Strain Rate, J. Appl. Mech., Trans. ASME, Vol 67, 1945, p A-824 5. J.C. Fisher and C.W. McGregor, A Velocity Modiﬁed Temperature for the Plastic Flow of Metals, J. Appl. Mech., Trans. ASME, Vol 68, 1946, p A-11 6. J.H. Holloman and J.D. Lubahn, The Flow of Metals at High Temperatures, General Electric Review, Vol 50, Feb 1947, p 28–32; April 1947, p 44–50 7. J.H. Holloman and C. Zener, Problems in Non-Elastic Deformation of Metals, J. Appl. Phys., Vol 17, Feb 1946, p 69-82 8. J.H. Holloman and L.C. Jaffe, Time-Temperature Relations in Tempering Steel, Trans. AIME, Iron and Steel Div., Vol 162, 1945, p 223–249 9. S.S. Manson and A.M. Haferd, “A Linear Time-Temperature Relation for Extrapolation of Creep and Stress-Rupture Data,” Technical Note 2890, NACA, March, 1953 10. F.R. Larson and J. Miller, A time-Temperature Relationship for Rupture and Creep Stresses, Trans. ASME, Vol 74, July 1952, p 765–771 11. S.S. Manson, “Design Considerations for Long Life at Elevated Temperatures,” Technical Report TP-1-63, NASA, 1963 12. O.D. Sherby and J.E. Dorn, Creep Correlations in Alpha Solid Solutions of Aluminum, Trans. AIME, Vol 194, 1952 13. K.O. Bogardus, R.C. Malcolm, and M. Holt, “Extrapolation of Creep-Rupture Data for Aluminum Alloys,” presented at 1968 ASM Materials Engineering Congress, (Detroit, MI), D8-100, American Society for Metals, 1968, p 361–390 14. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, ASME, updated periodically. 15. W.C Leslie, J.W. Jones, and H.R. Voorhees, Long Term Creep Rupture Properties of Aluminum Alloys, ASTM Proc., 1980, p 32–41 16. Granta MI:Lab, product and trademark of Granta Design Ltd., Cambridge, England 17. J. Gilbert Kaufman, Properties of Aluminum Alloys—High Temperature Creep and Fatigue Data, ASM International, 2001 18. Alloy Center, ASM International, http://products.asminternational.org/alloycenter/index.jsp 19. J.G. Kaufman, Zh. Long, S. Ningileri, Application of Parametric Analyses to Aluminum Alloys, Proc. TMS Light Metals Symposium, TMS, Warrendale, PA, 2007 20. Corrosion of Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys, Corrosion: Materials, Vol 13B, ASM Handbook, ASM International, 2006 21. “Test Method for Visual Assessment of Exfoliation Corrosion Susceptibility of 5XXX Series Aluminum Alloys (ASSET

Theory and Application of Time-Temperature Parameters / 21 Test),” G 66, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 03.02, ASTM International 22. “Test Method for Determining Susceptibility to Intergranular Corrosion of 5XXX Series Aluminum Alloys by Mass Loss after Exposure to Nitric Acid (NAMLT Test),” G 67 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 03.02, ASTM International 23. “Speciﬁcation for High-Magnesium Aluminum Alloy Sheet and Plate for Marine Service or Similar Environments,” B 928, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 02.02, ASTM International

• • •

•

ADDITIONAL SUPPORT REFERENCES

• On Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys

•

•

• • • •

• •

The Aluminum Association Alloy and Temper Registrations Records: Designations and Chemical Composition Limits for Aluminum Alloys in the Form of Castings and Ingot, The Aluminum Association, Inc., Washington, DC, Jan 1996 The Aluminum Association Alloy and Temper Registrations Records: Tempers for Aluminum and Aluminum Alloy Products, The Aluminum Association, Inc., Washington, DC, Feb 1995 Aluminum Casting Technology, 2nd ed., The American Foundrymens’ Society, Inc., D. Zalenas, Ed., Des Plaines, IL, 1993 The Aluminum Design Manual, The Aluminum Association, Arlington, VA, 2005 Aluminum Standards and Data, English and Metric Editions, The Aluminum Association, Arlington, VA, 2005 American National Standard Alloy and Temper Designation Systems for Aluminum, ANSI H35.1-1997, American National Standards Institute (ANSI), The Aluminum Association, Inc., Secretariat, Washington, DC, 1997 Applications of Aluminum Alloys, The Aluminum Association, Arlington, VA, 2001 Application of Aluminum to Fast Ferries, Alumitech 97, The Aluminum Association, Arlington, VA, 1997

• •

D.G. Altenpohl, Aluminum: Technology, Applications and Environment, The Aluminum Association Inc., and TMS, 1999 International Accord on Wrought Aluminum Alloy Designations, The Aluminum Association, Inc., Washington, DC, published periodically. “NADCA Product Specification Standards for Die Castings Produced by the Semi-Solid and Squeeze Casting Processes,” Publication No. 403, 2nd ed., North American Die Casting Association (NADCA), Rosemont, IL 1999 NFFS Directory of Non-Ferrous Foundries, Non-Ferrous Founders Society, Des Plaines, IL, 1996-7 (published periodically) The NFFS Guide to Aluminum Casting Design: Sand and Permanent Mold, Non-Ferrous Founders Society, Des Plaines, IL, 1994 Product Design for Die Casting in Recyclable Aluminum, Magnesium, Zinc, and ZA Alloys, Die Casting Development Council, La Grange, IL, 1996 Standards for Aluminum Sand and Permanent Mold Casting, The Aluminum Association, Inc., Washington, DC, Dec 1992

On Corrosion Resistance of Aluminum Alloys • Aluminum, K.R. Van Horn, Ed., Three-volume set, American Society For Metals, 1960 • Handbook of Corrosion Data, 2nd ed., ASM International 1995 On Test Methods • “Methods for Conducting Creep, Creep-Rupture, and StressRupture Test of Metallic Materials,” E 139, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 03.01, ASTM International (updated periodically) • “Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials,” E 8, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 03.03, ASTM International (updated periodically) • “Test Methods for Tension Testing Wrought and Cast Aluminum and Wrought and Cast Magnesium Alloy Products, B 557, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 02.02, ASTM International (updated periodically)

Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys J. Gilbert Kaufman, p 23-150 DOI: 10.1361/paht2008p023

Copyright © 2008 ASM International® All rights reserved. www.asminternational.org

Data Sets Wrought Alloys 1100-O, H14, H18 Table 1100-1 Temperature (T) °F

°R

1100-O plate 150 610 200

250

300

350

660

710

760

810

Stress rupture strengths of 1 in. thick 1100 plate at various temperatures Stress, ksi

8.0 7.0 8.0 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.8 5.7 5.5 5.0 4.9 4.5 4.0 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.8 5.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.8 5.5 5.0 4.9 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.0 1.9

Temperature (T) t, h

2033 28,560 47.7 549 1735 6093 10,650 16,180 21,390 80,550 106,500 336,700 1,618,000 15 40 172 290 1082 0.96 2.62 7.8 12.7 23.5 73.4 93.6 254 994 4128 11,570 16,640 23,930 85,420 130,600 193,600 12 48.5 185 489 966 3189 4748 6871 10,830 17,560 22,680 99,430 202,400

log t

3.308 4.456 1.679 2.739 3.239 3.785 4.027 4.209 4.330 4.906 5.027 5.527 6.209 1.176 1.602 2.237 2.462 3.034 –0.016 0.418 0.892 1.103 1.371 1.866 1.971 2.405 2.997 3.616 4.063 4.221 4.379 4.932 5.116 5.287 1.079 1.686 2.267 3.689 2.985 3.504 3.677 3.837 4.035 4.244 4.356 4.998 5.301

°F

°R

375

835

400

860

450

910

1100-H14 Plate 200 660

250

300

710

760

Temperature (T)

Stress, ksi

t, h

log t

3.5 3.2 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.5

45.3 116 224 3.4 11.1 29.8 56 174.5 254 357 552 1107 4955 8700 16,450 36,930 84,710 189,100 4.5 13.1 18.7 39 28.1 529 970 9701

1.656 2.063 2.351 0.533 1.045 1.474 1.748 2.242 2.405 2.553 2.742 3.044 3.649 3.940 4.219 4.567 4.929 5.277 0.657 1.119 1.272 1.591 2.448 2.723 2.987 3.987

15.0 13.0 12.0 11.5 11.0 10.5 10.2 10.1 10.0 8.0 13.0 12.0 11.5 10.0 12.0 11.5 11.0 10.1 10.0 8.0

86.4 1509 6534 13,590 27,310 56,830 83,410 99,300 114,200 2,066,000 6.5 105.5 280 2629 1.94 6.7 18 88.1 98.5 1229

1.936 3.179 3.815 4.133 4.436 4.755 4.921 4.997 5.058 6.315 0.814 2.032 2.448 3.420 0.287 0.826 1.255 1.945 1.993 3.089

°F

°R

350

810

375 400

835 860

450

910

1100-H18 plate 212 672 300

760

350

810

400

860

Stress, ksi

7.0 6.0 5.0 4.8 4.7 4.0 7.0 6.0 4.8 4.7 4.0 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.5 6.0 5.0 4.8 4.7 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.0 1.9 1.8 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.7 2.5 2.0 20.0 15.0 14.0 10.0 8.0 12.0 8.0 6.0 9.0 7.0 5.0

t, h

log t

4386 15,190 52,610 85,400 102,500 400,500 197 631 3189 3782 13,590 88,750 114,600 148,000 488,500 148 114 175 205 4002 5093 6481 12,660 15,680 19,950 62,620 89,360 120,000 254 319 400 753 1158 3268

3.642 4.182 4.721 4.932 5.011 5.603 2.294 2.800 3.504 3.578 4.133 4.948 5.059 5.170 5.689 2.171 2.056 2.242 2.312 3.602 3.707 3.812 4.102 4.195 4.300 4.797 4.951 5.079 2.404 2.503 2.602 2.877 3.064 3.514

1.5 12.8 1.75 44.5 194 1 22.5 116 1.1 6.5 29

0.178 1.107 0.243 1.648 2.288 0.000 1.352 2.064 0.041 0.813 1.462

24 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 1100-2

Stress rupture strengths of 1100-O plate with LMP values for four values of CLMP

Temperature (T)

CLMP = 13.9

°F

°R

Stress, ksi

150

610 610 660 660 660 660 660 660 660 660 660 660 660 710 710 710 710 710 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 835 835 835 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860

8.0 7.0 8.0 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.8 5.7 5.5 5.0 4.9 4.5 4.0 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.8 5.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.8 5.5 5.0 4.9 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.25 2.0 1.9 3.5 3.2 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.25 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5

200

250

300

350

375 400

t, h

2033 28,560 47.7 549 1735 6093 10,650 16,180 21,390 80,550 106,500 336,700 1,618,000 15 40 172 290 1082 0.96 2.62 7.8 12.7 23.5 73.4 93.6 254 994 4128 11,570 16,640 23,930 85,420 130,600 193,600 12 48.5 185 489 966 3189 4748 6871 10,830 17,560 22,680 99,430 202,400 45.3 116 224 3.4 11.1 29.8 56 174.5 254 357 552 1107 4955 8700 16,450 36,930 84,710 189,100

CLMP = 17.4

CLMP = 20.3

CLMP = 25.3

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

3.308 4.456 1.679 2.739 3.239 3.785 4.027 4.209 4.330 4.906 5.027 5.527 6.209 1.176 1.602 2.237 2.462 3.034 –0.016 0.418 0.892 1.103 1.371 1.866 1.971 2.405 2.997 3.616 4.063 4.221 4.379 4.932 5.116 5.287 1.079 1.686 2.267 2.689 2.985 3.504 3.677 3.837 4.035 4.244 4.356 4.998 5.301 1.656 2.063 2.351 0.533 1.045 1.474 1.748 2.242 2.405 2.553 2.742 3.044 3.649 3.940 4.219 4.567 4.929 5.277

17.2 18.4 15.6 16.6 17.1 17.7 17.9 18.1 18.2 18.8 18.9 19.4 20.1 15.1 15.5 16.1 16.4 16.9 13.9 14.3 14.8 15.0 15.3 15.8 15.9 16.3 16.9 17.5 18.0 18.1 18.3 18.8 19.0 19.2 15.0 15.6 16.2 16.6 16.9 17.4 17.6 17.7 17.9 18.1 18.3 18.9 19.2 15.6 16.0 16.3 14.4 14.9 15.4 15.6 16.1 16.3 16.5 16.6 16.9 17.5 17.8 18.1 18.5 18.8 19.2

10,497 11,197 10,282 10,982 11,312 11,672 11,832 11,952 12,032 12,412 12,492 12,822 13,272 10,704 11,006 11,457 11,617 12,023 10,552 10,882 11,242 11,402 11,606 11,982 12,062 12,392 12,842 13,312 13,652 13,772 13,892 14,312 14,452 14,582 12,133 12,625 13,095 13,437 13,677 14,097 14,237 14,367 14,527 14,697 14,787 15,307 15,553 12,989 13,329 13,570 12,412 12,853 13,222 13,457 13,882 14,022 14,150 14,312 14,572 15,092 15,342 15,582 15,882 16,193 16,492

20.7 21.9 19.1 20.1 20.6 21.2 21.4 21.6 21.7 22.3 22.4 22.9 23.6 18.6 19.0 19.6 19.9 20.4 17.4 17.8 18.3 18.5 18.8 19.3 19.4 19.8 20.4 21.0 21.5 21.6 21.8 22.3 22.5 22.7 18.5 19.1 19.7 20.1 20.4 20.9 21.1 21.2 21.4 21.6 21.8 22.4 22.7 19.1 19.5 19.8 17.9 18.4 18.9 19.1 19.6 19.8 20.0 20.1 20.4 21.0 21.3 21.6 22.0 22.3 22.7

12,632 13,332 12,592 13,292 13,622 13,982 14,142 14,262 14,342 14,722 14,802 15,132 15,582 13,189 13,491 13,942 14,102 14,508 13,212 13,542 13,902 14,062 14,266 14,642 14,722 15,052 15,502 15,972 16,312 16,432 16,552 16,972 17,112 17,242 14,968 15,460 15,930 16,272 16,512 16,932 17,072 17,202 17,362 17,532 17,622 18,142 18,388 15,912 16,252 16,492 15,422 15,863 16,232 16,467 16,892 17,032 17,160 17,322 17,582 18,102 18,352 18,592 18,892 19,203 19,502

23.6 24.8 22.0 23.0 23.5 24.1 24.3 24.5 24.6 25.2 25.3 25.8 26.5 21.5 21.9 22.5 22.8 23.3 20.3 20.7 21.2 21.4 21.7 22.2 22.3 22.7 23.3 23.9 24.4 24.5 24.7 25.2 25.4 25.6 21.4 22.0 22.6 23.0 23.3 23.8 24.0 24.1 24.3 24.5 24.7 25.3 25.6 22.0 22.4 22.7 20.8 21.3 21.8 22.0 22.5 22.7 22.9 23.0 23.3 23.9 24.2 24.5 24.9 25.2 25.6

14,401 15,101 14,506 15,206 15,536 15,896 16,056 16,176 16,256 16,636 16,716 17,046 17,496 15,248 15,550 16,001 16,161 16,567 15,416 15,746 16,106 16,266 16,470 16,846 16,926 17,256 17,706 18,176 18,516 18,636 18,756 19,176 19,316 19,446 17,317 17,809 18,279 18,621 18,861 19,281 19,421 19,551 19,711 19,881 19,971 20,491 20,737 18,333 18,673 18,914 17,916 18,357 18,726 18,961 19,386 19,526 19,654 19,816 20,076 20,596 20,846 21,086 21,386 21,697 21,996

28.6 29.8 27.0 28.0 28.5 29.1 29.3 29.5 29.6 30.2 30.3 30.8 31.5 26.5 26.9 27.5 27.8 28.3 25.3 25.7 26.2 26.4 26.7 27.2 27.3 27.7 28.3 28.9 29.4 29.5 29.7 30.2 30.4 30.6 26.4 27.0 27.6 28.0 28.3 28.8 29.0 29.1 29.3 29.5 29.7 30.3 30.6 27.0 27.4 27.7 25.8 26.3 26.8 27.0 27.5 27.7 27.9 28.0 28.3 28.9 29.2 29.5 29.9 30.2 30.6

17,451 18,151 17,806 18,506 18,836 19,196 19,356 19,476 19,556 19,936 20,016 20,346 20,796 18,798 19,100 19,551 19,711 20,117 19,216 19,546 19,906 20,066 20,270 20,646 20,726 21,056 21,506 21,976 22,316 22,436 22,556 22,976 23,116 23,246 21,367 21,859 22,329 22,671 22,911 23,331 23,471 23,601 23,761 23,931 24,021 24,541 24,787 22,508 22,848 23,089 22,216 22,657 23,026 23,261 23,686 23,826 23,954 24,116 24,376 24,896 25,146 25,386 25,686 25,997 26,296

(continued)

Data Sets / 25 Table 1100-2

(continued)

Temperature (T) °F

450

500

550

600

CLMP = 13.9

CLMP = 17.4

CLMP = 20.3

CLMP = 25.3

°R

Stress, ksi

t, h

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

910 910 910 910 910 910 910 910 960 960 960 960 960 1010 1010 1010 1010 1010 1060

3.0 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.5 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.5 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.5

4.5 13.1 18.7 39 28.1 529 970 9701 23.5 48.2 76.4 330 678 2.53 4.48 7.75 31.1 35 7

0.657 1.119 1.272 1.591 2.448 2.723 2.987 3.987 1.371 1.683 1.883 2.519 2.831 0.404 0.651 0.889 1.493 1.544 0.845

14.6 15.0 15.2 15.5 16.3 16.6 16.9 17.9 15.3 15.6 15.8 16.4 16.7 14.3 14.6 14.8 15.4 15.4 15.3

13,247 13,667 13,807 14,097 14,877 15,127 15,367 16,277 14,660 14,960 15,152 15,762 16,062 14,447 14,697 14,937 15,547 15,598 16,187

18.1 18.5 18.7 19.0 19.8 20.1 20.4 21.4 18.8 19.1 19.3 19.9 20.2 17.8 18.1 18.3 18.9 18.9 18.8

16,432 16,852 16,992 17,282 18,062 18,312 18,552 19,462 18,020 18,320 18,512 19,122 19,422 17,982 18,232 18,472 19,082 19,133 19,897

21.0 21.4 21.6 21.9 22.7 23.0 23.3 24.3 21.7 22.0 22.2 22.8 23.1 20.7 21.0 21.2 21.8 21.8 21.7

19,071 19,491 19,631 19,921 20,701 20,951 21,191 22,101 20,804 21,104 21,296 21,906 22,206 20,911 21,161 21,401 22,011 22,062 22,971

26.0 26.4 26.6 26.9 27.7 28.0 28.3 29.3 26.7 27.0 27.2 27.8 28.1 25.7 26.0 26.2 26.8 26.8 26.1

23,621 24,041 24,181 24,471 25,251 25,501 25,741 26,651 25,604 25,904 26,096 26,706 27,006 25,961 26,211 26,451 27,061 27,112 27,714

°R

660

710

760

810

860

°F

200

250

300

350

400

Temperature (T)

yr

20 50 20 50 20 50 20 50 20 50

h

175,000 440,000 175,000 440,000 175,000 440,000 175,000 440,000 175,000 440,000

Time (t)

log t

5.243 5.643 5.243 5.643 5.243 5.643 5.243 5.643 5.243 5.643

19.0 19.4 19.0 19.4 19.0 19.4 19.0 19.4 19.0 19.4

C + log t

12,568 12,832 13,521 13,805 14,473 14,777 15,425 15,749 16,377 16,721

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 13.8

9.1 6.1 9.1 6.1 3.9 3.0 2.8 2.2 2.2 2.0

Extrapolated stress, ksi

22.6 23.0 22.6 23.0 22.6 23.0 22.6 23.0 22.6 23.0

C + log t

14,944 15,208 16,077 16,361 17,209 17,513 18,341 18,665 19,473 19,817

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 17.4

9.0 6.0 9.0 6.0 3.8 2.6 2.5 2.1 2.0 1.9

Extrapolated stress, ksi

Effect of LMP constant value on long-time extrapolated stresses for 1100-O

Desired extrapolation

Table 1100-3

25.5 25.9 25.5 25.9 25.5 25.9 25.5 25.9 25.5 25.9

C + log t

16,858 17,122 18,136 18,420 19,413 19,717 20,690 21,014 21,967 22,311

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 20.3

9.0 7.2 9.0 7.2 3.9 2.8 2.6 2.1 2.1 2.0

Extrapolated stress, ksi

30.5 30.9 30.5 30.9 30.5 30.9 30.5 30.9 30.5 30.9

C + log t

20,158 20,422 21,686 21,970 23,213 23,517 24,740 25,064 26,267 26,611

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 25.3

9.0 7.2 9.0 7.2 3.9 2.8 2.6 2.1 2.1 2.0

Extrapolated stress, ksi

26 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Data Sets / 27 Table 1100-4 Temperature (T) °F

°R

Short-life (<10,000 h) stress rupture strengths of 1100 plate at various temperatures Stress, ksi

1 in. thick 1100-O plate 150 610 8.0 200 660 8.0 7.0 6.5 6.0 250 710 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.8 5.5 300 760 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.8 5.5 5.0 4.9 4.5 4.0 3.5 350 810 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 375 835 3.5 3.2 3.0 400 860 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.0 1.9 450 910 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.5 500 960 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.5 550 1010 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.5 600 1060 1.5

Temperature (T) t, h

log t

°F

°R

Stress, ksi

t, h

log t

1 in. thick 1100-H14 plate 2033 47.7 549 1735 6093 15 40 172 290 1082 0.96 2.62 7.8 12.7 23.5 73.4 93.6 254 994 4128 12 48.5 185 489 966 3189 4748 6871 45.3 116 224 3.4 11.1 29.8 56 174.5 254 357 552 1107 4955 8700 4.5 13.1 18.7 39 28.1 529 970 9701 23.5 48.2 76.4 330 678 2.53 4.48 7.75 31.1 35 7

3.308 1.679 2.739 3.239 3.785 1.176 1.602 2.237 2.462 3.034 –0.016 0.418 0.892 1.103 1.371 1.866 1.971 2.405 2.997 3.616 1.079 1.686 2.267 3.689 2.985 3.504 3.677 3.837 1.656 2.063 2.351 0.533 1.045 1.474 1.748 2.242 2.405 2.553 2.742 3.044 3.649 3.940 0.657 1.119 1.272 1.591 2.448 2.723 2.987 3.987 1.371 1.683 1.883 2.519 2.831 0.404 0.651 0.889 1.493 1.544 0.845

200

660

250

710

300

760

350

810

375 400

835 860

450

910

500

960

550

1,010

15.0 13.0 12.0 13.0 12.0 11.5 10.0 12.0 11.5 11.0 10.1 10.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 4.8 4.7 6.0 5.0 4.8 4.7 3.2 3.1 3.0 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.7 2.5 2.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.5 2.7 2.6 1.9 1.8

86.4 1509 6534 6.5 105.5 280 2629 1.94 6.7 18 88.1 98.5 1229 4386 197 631 3189 3782 148 114 175 205 4002 5093 6481 254 319 400 753 1158 3268 60.1 72.9 90.4 242 346 451 1265 6.16 7.4 32.6 41.9

1.936 3.179 3.815 0.814 2.032 2.448 3.420 0.287 0.826 1.255 1.945 1.993 3.089 3.642 2.294 2.800 3.504 3.578 2.171 2.056 2.242 2.312 3.602 3.707 3.812 2.404 2.503 2.602 2.877 3.064 3.514 1.779 1.863 1.956 2.383 2.540 2.654 3.102 0.791 0.869 1.513 1.622

28 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 1100-5

Isostress calculations for 1100-O plate based on short-life data (<10,000 h)

Isostress, ksi

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

t1, h

log t1

8.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.5 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

200 250 300 300 250 300 300 250 300 300 300 350 350 400 400 350 375 375 400 400 400 375 400 400 450 450 450 450 500 500 550 550 550 500 550 550 600 600 600

660 710 760 760 710 760 760 710 760 760 760 810 810 860 860 810 835 835 860 860 860 835 860 860 910 910 910 910 960 960 1010 1010 1010 960 1010 1010 1060 1060 1060

47.7 15 0.96 0.96 40 2.62 2.62 172 7.8 7.8 23.5 12 48.5 3.4 3.4 185 45.3 45.3 11.1 11.1 11.1 224 56 56 4.5 4.5 4.5 28.1 23.5 23.5 2.53 2.53 2.53 678 35 35 7 7 7

1.679 1.176 –0.016 –0.016 1.602 0.418 0.418 2.237 0.892 0.892 1.371 1.079 1.686 0.533 0.533 2.267 1.656 1.656 1.045 1.045 1.045 2.351 1.748 1.748 0.657 0.657 0.657 2.448 1.371 1.371 0.404 0.404 0.404 2.831 1.544 1.544 0.845 0.845 0.845

Table 1100-6

Temperature (T2) T1 log t1

1108.0 835.0 –12.2 –12.2 1137.4 317.7 317.7 1588.3 677.9 677.9 1042.0 874.0 1365.7 458.4 458.4 1836.3 1382.8 1382.8 898.7 898.7 898.7 1963.1 1503.3 1503.3 597.9 597.9 597.9 2227.7 1316.2 1316.2 408.0 408.0 408.0 2717.8 1559.4 1559.4 895.7 895.7 895.7

°F

150 200 250 200 200 250 200 200 250 200 250 300 300 350 300 300 300 350 300 350 375 350 375 350 400 375 350 400 450 400 500 450 400 450 500 450 550 500 450

°R

t2, h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

610 660 710 660 660 710 660 660 710 660 710 760 760 810 760 760 760 810 760 810 835 810 835 810 860 835 810 860 910 860 960 910 860 910 960 910 1010 960 910

2033 549 15 549 1735 40 1735 6093 172 6093 1082 254 994 48.5 994 4128 4128 185 4128 185 45.3 966 224 966 56 224 966 4955 28.1 4955 23.5 28.1 4955 9701 678 9701 35 678 9701

3.308 2.739 1.176 2.739 3.239 1.602 3.239 3.785 2.237 3.785 3.034 2.405 2.997 1.686 2.997 3.616 3.616 2.267 3.616 2.267 1.656 2.985 2.351 2.985 1.748 2.351 2.985 3.849 2.448 3.849 1.371 2.448 3.849 3.987 2.831 3.987 1.544 2.831 3.987

2018.0 1807.7 835.0 1807.7 2137.7 1137.4 2137.7 2498.1 1588.3 2498.1 2154.1 1827.8 2277.7 1365.7 2277.7 2748.2 2748.2 1836.3 2748.2 1836.3 1382.8 2417.9 1963.1 2417.9 1503.3 1963.1 2417.9 3310.1 2227.7 3310.1 1316.2 2227.7 3310.1 3628.2 2717.8 3628.2 1559.4 2717.8 3628.2

–910.0 –972.8 –847.1 –1819.9 –1000.3 –819.7 –1820.1 –909.8 –910.4 –1820.2 –1112.2 –953.8 –912.1 –907.3 –1819.3 –911.9 –1365.4 –453.5 –1849.5 –937.6 –484.1 –454.8 –459.8 –914.6 –905.4 –1365.2 –1820.0 –1082.5 –911.5 –1994.0 –908.1 –1819.6 –2902.1 –910.4 –1158.3 –2068.7 –663.7 –1822.1 –2732.5

T2 – T1

CLMP

–50 18.2 –50 19.5 –50 16.9 –100 18.2 –50 20.0 –50 16.4 –100 18.2 –50 18.2 –50 18.2 –100 18.2 –50 22.2 –50 19.1 –50 18.2 –50 18.1 –100 18.2 –50 18.2 –75 18.2 –25 18.1 –100 18.5 –50 18.8 –25 19.4 –25 18.2 –25 18.4 –50 18.3 –50 18.1 –75 18.2 –100 18.2 –50 21.6 –50 18.2 –100 19.9 –50 18.2 –100 18.2 –150 19.3 –50 18.2 –50 23.2 –100 20.7 –50 13.3 –100 18.2 –150 18.2 Average CLMP = 18.1

Isostress calculations for 1100-H14 plate based on short-life data (<10,000 h)

Isostress, ksi

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

t 1, h

log t1

Temperature (T2)

13.0 12.0 10.0 7.0

250 300 300 250 300 350

710 760 760 710 760 810

6.5 1.94 1.94 105.5 98.5 197

0.814 0.287 0.287 2.032 1.993 2.294

6.0 4.7 3.0

375 400 450

835 860 910

148 205 400

2.5 2.0 1.9 1.8

500 500 550 550

960 960 1010 1010

90.4 242 32.6 41.9

°F

°R

t2, h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

CLMP

577.9 218.1 218.1 1442.7 1514.7 1858.1

200 250 200 200 250 300

660 710 660 660 710 760

1509 105.5 6534 6534 2629 4386

3.179 2.032 3.815 3.815 3.420 3.642

2098.1 1442.7 2517.9 2517.9 2428.2 2767.9

–1520.2 –1224.6 –2299.8 –1075.2 –913.5 –909.8

–50 –50 –100 –50 –50 –50

30.4 24.5 23.0 21.5 18.3 18.2

2.171 2.312 2.602

1812.8 1988.3 2367.8

350 350 400

810 810 860

631 3782 6481

2.800 3.576 3.812

2268.0 2896.6 3278.3

–455.2 –908.2 –910.5

–25 –50 –50

18.2 18.2 18.2

1.956 2.383 1.513 1.622

1877.8 2287.7 1528.1 1638.2

450 450 500 500

910 910 960 960

1158 3266 346 451

3.064 3.514 2.540 2.654

2788.2 3197.7 2438.4 2547.8

–910.5 –910.1 –910.3 –909.6

–50 –50 –50 –50

18.2 18.2 18.2 18.2

T1 log t1

CLMP avg

Overall 20.3 For 0–10 ksi 18.2

Data Sets / 29 Table 1100-7 LMP calculations based on short-life stress rupture strengths of 1100-O and H14 plate at various temperatures Temperature ( T ) °F

°R

Stress, ksi

1 in. thick 1100-O plate 150 610 8.0 200 660 8.0 7.0 6.5 6.0 250 710 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.8 5.5 300 760 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.8 5.5 5.0 4.9 4.5 4.0 3.5 350 810 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 375 835 3.5 3.2 3.0 400 860 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.0 1.9 450 910 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.5 500 960 2.0 500 960 1.9 500 960 1.8 500 960 1.6 500 960 1.5 550 1010 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.5 600 1060 1.5

t, h

2033 47.7 549 1735 6093 15 40 172 290 1082 0.96 2.62 7.8 12.7 23.5 73.4 93.6 254 994 4128 12 48.5 185 489 966 3189 4748 6871 45.3 116 224 3.4 11.1 29.8 56 174.5 254 357 552 1107 4955 8700 4.5 13.1 18.7 39 28.1 529 970 9701 23.5 48.2 76.4 330 678 2.53 4.48 7.75 31.1 35 7

log t

3.308 1.679 2.739 3.239 3.785 1.176 1.602 2.237 2.462 3.034 –0.016 0.418 0.892 1.103 1.371 1.866 1.971 2.405 2.997 3.616 1.079 1.686 2.267 3.689 2.985 3.504 3.677 3.837 1.656 2.063 2.351 0.533 1.045 1.474 1.748 2.242 2.405 2.553 2.742 3.044 3.649 3.940 0.657 1.119 1.272 1.591 2.448 2.723 2.987 3.987 1.371 1.683 1.883 2.519 2.831 0.404 0.651 0.889 1.493 1.544 0.845

C + log t CLMP = 18.2

21.51 19.88 20.94 21.44 21.99 19.38 19.80 20.44 20.66 21.23 18.18 18.62 19.09 19.30 19.57 20.07 20.17 20.61 21.20 21.82 19.28 19.89 20.47 21.89 21.19 21.70 21.88 22.04 19.86 20.26 20.55 18.73 19.25 19.67 19.95 20.44 20.61 20.75 20.94 21.24 21.85 22.14 18.86 19.32 19.47 19.79 20.65 20.92 21.19 22.19 19.57 19.88 20.08 20.72 21.03 18.60 18.85 19.09 19.69 19.74 19.05

Temperature (T) T(C + log t)

13,120 13,120 13,820 14,150 14,510 13,757 14,059 14,510 14,670 15,076 13,820 14,150 14,510 14,670 14,874 15,250 15,330 15,660 16,110 16,580 15,616 16,108 16,578 17,730 17,160 17,580 17,720 17,850 16,580 16,920 17,160 16,110 16,551 16,920 17,155 17,580 17,720 17,848 18,010 18,270 18,790 19,040 17,160 17,580 17,720 18,010 18,790 19,040 19,280 20,190 18,788 19,088 19,280 19,890 20,190 18,790 19,040 19,280 19,890 19,941 20,188

°F

°R

Stress, ksi

1 in. thick 1100-H14 plate 200 660 15.0 13.0 12.0 250 710 13.0 12.0 11.5 10.0 300 760 12.0 11.5 11.0 10.1 10.0 8.0 7.0 350 810 7.0 6.0 4.8 4.7 375 835 6.0 400 860 5.0 4.8 4.7 3.2 3.1 3.0 450 910 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.7 2.5 2.0 500 960 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.5 550 1,010 2.7 2.6 1.9 1.8

t, h

86.4 1509.0 6534 6.5 105.5 280 2629 1.94 6.7 18 88.1 98.5 1229 4386 197 631 3189 3782 148 114 175 205 4002 5093 6481 254 319 400 753 1158 3268 60.1 72.9 90.4 242 346 451 1265 6.16 7.4 32.6 41.9

log t

C + log t CLMP = 18.2

1.936 3.179 3.815 0.814 2.032 2.448 3.420 0.287 0.826 1.255 1.945 1.993 3.089 3.642 2.294 2.800 3.504 3.578 2.171 2.056 2.242 2.312 3.602 3.707 3.812 2.404 2.503 2.602 2.877 3.064 3.514 1.779 1.863 1.956 2.383 2.540 2.654 3.102 0.791 0.869 1.513 1.622

20.14 21.38 22.02 19.01 20.23 20.65 21.62 18.49 19.03 19.46 20.15 20.19 21.29 21.84 20.49 21.00 21.70 21.78 20.37 20.26 20.44 20.51 21.80 21.91 22.01 20.60 20.70 20.80 21.08 21.26 21.71 19.98 20.06 20.16 20.58 20.74 20.85 21.30 18.99 19.07 19.71 19.82

T(C + log t)

13,290 14,110 14,530 13,500 14,365 14,660 15,350 14,050 14,460 14,786 15,310 15,347 16,180 16,600 16,600 17,010 17,580 17,640 17,010 17,420 17,580 17,640 18,750 18,840 18,930 18,750 18,840 18,930 19,180 19,350 19,760 19,180 19,260 19,350 19,760 19,910 20,020 20,450 19,181 19,260 19,910 20,020

30 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 1100-8 Comparison of actual long-life test results with extrapolated values for stress rupture strengths of 1100-O based on short-life (<10,000 h) stress rupture tests Actual test results Temperature (T) °F

°R

150 200

610 660

300

760

350

810

400

860

Test stress, ksi

CLMP = 18.2

Actual rupture life (t), h

7.0 5.8 5.7 5.5 5.0 4.9 4.5 4.0 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5

28,560 10,650 16,180 21,390 80,550 106,500 336,700 1,618,000 11,570 16,640 23,930 85,420 130,600 193,600 10,830 17,560 22,680 99,430 210,000 16,540 36,930 84,710 189,100

log t

C + log t (18.2 + log t)

T(C + log t)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

4.456 4.027 4.209 4.330 4.906 5.027 5.527 6.209 4.063 4.221 4.379 4.932 5.116 5.287 4.036 4.244 4.356 4.998 5.301 4.219 4.567 4.928 5.276

22.66 22.23 22.41 22.53 23.11 23.23 23.73 24.41 22.26 22.42 22.58 23.13 23.32 23.49 22.24 22.44 22.56 23.20 23.50 22.42 22.77 23.13 23.48

13,820 14,670 14,790 14,870 15,250 15,330 15,660 16,110 16,920 17,040 17,160 17,580 17,720 17,850 18,011 18,180 18,270 18,790 19,036 19,280 19,580 19,890 20,189

7.0 5.8 5.6 5.5 5.0 4.9 4.5 4.0 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5

Table 1100-9 Comparison of actual long-life test results with extrapolated values for stress rupture strengths of 1100-H14 based on short-life (<10,000 h) stress rupture tests Actual test results Temperature (T) °F

°R

200

660

300

760

350

810

400

860

CLMP = 18.2

Test stress, ksi

Actual rupture life (t), h

log t

C + log t (18.2 + log t)

T(C + log t)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

10.0 8.0 6.0 5.0 4.8 4.7 4.0 4.0 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.5 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.0 1.9 1.8

114,200 206,600 15,190 52,610 85,400 102,500 400,500 13,590 88,750 114,600 148,000 488,500 12,660 15,680 19,950 62,620 89,360 120,000

5.058 6.315 4.182 4.721 4.932 5.011 5.603 4.133 4.948 5.059 5.170 5.689 4.102 4.195 4.300 4.797 4.951 5.079

23.26 24.52 22.38 22.92 23.13 23.21 23.80 22.33 23.15 23.26 23.37 23.89 22.30 22.40 22.50 23.00 23.15 23.28

15,350 16,180 17,010 17,420 17,580 17,640 18,090 18,090 18,750 18,840 18,930 19,350 19,180 19,260 19,350 19,777 19,910 20,020

10.0 8.0 6.0 5.0 4.8 4.7 4.0 4.0 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.5 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.0 1.9 1.8

Data Sets / 31 Table 1100-10 of CLMP

Stress rupture strengths of 1100-H18 rolled and drawn rod at various temperatures and isostress calculations

Temperature (T) °F

212 300 350 400 500

°R

Stress, ksi

t, h

log t

672 672 760 760 760 810 810 810 860 860 860 960 960 960

20.0 15.0 13.0 10.0 8.0 12.0 8.0 6.0 9.0 6.0 5.0 3.5 2.5 2.0

15.5 130 1.68 44.5 190 1 22 110 1.05 6.5 19 0.73 26 800

1.190 2.114 0.199 1.648 2.279 0.000 1.342 2.041 0.021 0.813 1.279 –0.137 1.415 2.902

Isostress, ksi

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

t1, h

log t1

15.0 10.0 9.0

300 350 350 400 400 350 400 400 350 400 400 400

760 810 810 860 860 810 860 860 810 860 860 860

0.9 5 9 1.05 1.05 22 3 3 110 13 13 29

–0.046 0.699 0.954 0.021 0.021 1.342 0.477 0.477 2.041 1.114 1.114 1.462

8.0 6.0 5.0

Temperature (T2) T1 log t1

–35.0 566.2 772.7 18.1 18.1 1087.0 410.2 410.2 1653.2 958.0 958.0 1257.3

°F

°R

212 300 300 300 350 300 300 350 300 300 350 350

672 760 760 760 810 760 760 810 760 760 810 810

t2, h

110 44.5 100 100 9 190 190 22 1000 1000 110 300

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

2.041 1.648 2.000 2.000 0.954 2.279 2.279 1.342 3.000 3.000 2.041 2.477

1371.6 1252.5 1520.0 1520.0 772.7 1732.0 1732.0 1087.0 2280.0 2280.0 1653.2 2006.4

–1406.5 –686.3 –747.3 –1501.9 –754.7 –645.0 –1321.8 -676.8 –626.8 –1322.0 –695.2 –749.1

T2 – T1

CLMP

–88 16.0 –50 13.7 –50 14.9 –100 15.0 –50 15.1 -50 12.9 –100 13.2 –50 13.5 –50 12.5 –100 13.2 –50 13.9 –50 15.0 Average CLMP = 14.1

32 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

8

7

Stress rupture strength, ksi

250 °F

200 °F

200 °F

6 300 °F

(disc.)

275 °F

5

(Test discontinued) 4 350 °F 3

375 °F 450 °F

2

400 °F

500 °F 600 °F

1

0 0.5

1

Alcoa data

10

U of M data

(disc.)

550 °F

102

Test temperature °F °R 200 660 212 672 250 710 275 735 300 760 350 810

103 Elapsed time, h

Alcoa data

Metal Properties Council Program. + Symbol with

Fig. 1100-1

U of M data

104

105

Test temperature °F °R 375 835 400 860 450 910 500 960 550 1010 600 1060

represents test discontinued without rupture.

Stress rupture strengths of 1 in. 1100-O plate at various temperatures. Stress versus rupture time. Dashed lines represent extrapolations of Alcoa data using the Larson-Miller Parameter.

Data Sets / 33 16 212 °F 200 °F

14

250 °F

Stress rupture strength, ksi

12 300 °F 10 350 °F 8 400 °F 6

375 °F

4 450 °F 550 °F

500 °F

2

0 1

10

102

104

103

105

Elapsed time, h

Alcoa data

U of M data

Symbol with

Fig. 1100-2

Test temperature °F °R 200 660 212 672 250 710 300 760 350 810

Alcoa data

U of M data

Test temperature °F °R 375 835 400 860 450 910 500 960 550 1010

represents test discontinued without rupture.

Stress rupture strengths of 1 in. 1100-H14 plate at various temperatures. Stress versus rupture time

34 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Stress rupture strength, ksi

8

6

4

2

0

0

17

18

Alcoa data

19

U of M data

20

21 22 23 24 Larson-Miller Parameter (LMP)/103

Test temperature °F °R 200 660 212 672 250 710 275 735 300 760 350 810

Alcoa data

25

U of M data

26

27

Test temperature °F °R 375 835 400 860 450 910 500 960 550 1010 600 1060

Fig. 1100-3

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 1100-O plate. CLMP = 25.3

Fig. 1100-4

Isostress plot of stress rupture strengths for 1100-O plate to determine Manson-Haferd constants

28

29

Data Sets / 35

Fig. 1100-5

Archival Manson-Haferd parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 1100-O plate. Ta = –500 °F; log ta = 21.66

Fig. 1100-6

Archival Dorn-Sherby parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 1100-O plate. ΔH = 44,100

36 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 1100-7

Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of 1100-O plate with varying CLMP

Fig. 1100-8

Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of 1100-O plate based on short-life data (<10,000 h). CLMP = 18.2

Data Sets / 37

Fig. 1100-9

Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of 1100-H14 plate based on short-life data (<10,000 h). CLMP = 18.2

Fig. 1100-10

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 0.1% creep strengths of 1100-O rolled and drawn rod. CLMP =17.6

38 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 1100-11

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 0.2% creep strengths of 1100-O plate. CLMP = 20.4

Fig. 1100-12

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 0.5% creep strengths of 1100-O plate. CLMP = 20.4

Data Sets / 39

Fig. 1100-13

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 1% creep strengths of 1100-O plate. CLMP = 20.4

Fig. 1100-14

Archival Larson-Miller master curve for 1100-H18 rod. CLMP = 12.8

40 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 1100-15

Archival Larson-Miller master curve for 1100-H18 plate. CLMP = 14

Data Sets / 41

2024-T851 Table 2024-1 Test temperature o

F

o

R

212

672

300

760

350

810

400

860

500

960

550

1010

600

1060

650

1110

700

1160

Stress rupture strengths of 2024-T851 plate with isostress calculations Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

61.0 59.5 58.5 56.0 55.0 52.0 52.0 48.0 44.0 42.0 47.0 43.0 38.0 32.0 42.0 37.0 28.0 22.0 26.0 19.0 13.0 8.0 6.0 8.0 6.0 13.0 8.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 2.0

4 6.5 14 77 400 2665 1.8 60 365 870 1.8 13 130 1000 1.25 11 200 771 2 18 82.5 594 2020 85 304 1 10.25 139 435 19 433 80

CLMP = 16.0

CLMP = 18.4

CLMP = 21.8

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

0.602 0.813 1.146 1.886 2.602 3.426 0.255 1.778 2.562 2.94 0.255 1.114 2.114 3.000 0.097 1.041 2.301 2.887 0.301 1.255 1.916 2.774 3.206 1.929 2.483 0.000 1.010 2.143 2.638 1.279 2.646 1.903

16.6 16.8 17.1 17.9 18.6 19.4 16.3 17.8 18.6 18.9 16.3 17.1 18.1 19.0 16.1 17.0 18.3 18.9 16.3 17.3 17.9 18.8 19.2 17.9 18.5 16.0 17.0 18.1 18.6 17.3 18.6 17.9

11,157 11,298 11,522 12,019 12,501 13,054 12,354 13,511 14,107 14,394 13,167 13,862 14,672 15,390 13,843 14,655 15,739 16,243 15,649 16,565 17,199 18,023 18,438 18,108 18,668 16,960 18,031 19,232 19,756 19,180 20,697 20,767

19.0 19.2 19.5 20.3 21.0 21.8 18.7 20.2 21.0 21.3 18.7 19.5 20.5 21.4 18.5 19.4 20.7 21.3 18.7 19.7 20.3 21.2 21.6 20.3 20.9 18.4 19.4 20.5 21.0 19.7 21.0 20.3

12,769 12,911 13,135 13,632 14,113 14,667 14,178 15,335 15,931 16,218 15,111 15,806 16,616 17,334 15,907 16,719 17,803 18,307 17,953 18,869 19,503 20,327 20742 20,532 21,092 19,504 20,575 21,776 22,300 21,844 23,361 23,551

22.4 22.6 22.9 23.7 24.4 25.2 22.1 23.6 24.4 24.7 22.1 22.9 23.9 24.8 21.9 22.8 24.1 24.7 22.1 23.1 23.7 24.6 25.0 23.7 24.3 21.8 22.8 23.9 24.4 23.1 24.4 23.7

15,054 15,196 15,420 15,917 16,398 16,952 16,762 17,919 18,515 18,802 17,865 18,560 19,370 20,088 18,831 19,643 20,727 21,231 21,217 22,133 22,767 23,591 24,006 23,966 24,526 23,108 24,179 25,380 25,904 25,618 27,135 27,495

Archival isostress calculations for CLMP for 2024-T851 plate Isostress, ksi

52.0 47.0 44.0 43.0 42.0 42.0 38.0 37.0 32.0 26.0 22.0 13.0 8.0 6.0 8.0 6.0 8.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

Temperature (T1)

Temperature (T2)

°F

°R

t1, h

log t1

T1 log t1

°F

212 300 300 300 300 300 350 350 350 350 400 400 500 500 500 500 500 550 550 600 600 650

672 760 760 760 760 760 810 810 810 810 860 860 960 960 960 960 960 1010 1010 1060 1060 1110

2665 94 365 560 870 870 34 156 220 970 320 771 82.5 594 2020 594 2020 85 304 139 435 433

3.426 1.973 2.562 2.748 2.940 2.940 1.531 2.193 2.342 2.940 2.505 2.887 1.916 2.774 3.305 2.774 3.305 1.929 2.483 2.143 2.638 2.636

2302.3 1499.5 1947.1 2088.5 2234.4 2234.4 1240.1 1776.3 1897.0 2381.4 2154.3 2482.8 1839.4 2663.0 3172.8 2663.0 3172.8 1948.3 2507.8 2271.6 2796.3 2926.0

300 350 350 350 350 400 400 400 400 400 500 500 600 600 600 550 550 600 600 650 650 700

°R

t2, h

log t2

T2 log t2

760 810 810 810 810 860 860 860 860 860 960 960 1060 1060 1060 1010 1010 1060 1060 1110 1110 1160

1.8 1.8 13 21 34 1.25 1.25 7.1 11 66 2 7.4 1 10.25 45 85 304 10.25 45 19 62 79.5

0.255 0.255 1.114 1.322 1.531 0.097 0.097 0.851 1.041 1.820 0.301 0.869 0.000 1.010 1.653 1.929 2.483 1.010 1.653 1.279 1.792 1.900

193.8 206.6 902.3 1070.8 1240.1 83.4 83.4 731.9 895.3 1565.2 289.0 834.2 0.0 1070.6 1752.2 1948.3 2507.8 1070.6 1752.2 1419.7 1989.1 2204.0

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

2108.5 1292.9 1044.8 1017.7 994.3 2151.0 1156.7 1044.5 1001.8 816.2 1865.3 1648.6 1839.4 1592.4 1420.6 714.8 665.0 877.7 755.7 851.9 807.2 722.0

T2 – T1

CLMP

CLMP avg

88 24.0 50 25.9 50 20.9 50 20.4 50 19.9 100 21.5 Average 50 23.1 for stress 50 20.9 ≥37 ksi 50 20.0 21.8 50 16.3 100 18.7 100 16.5 100 18.4 100 15.9 100 14.2 50 14.3 50 13.3 50 17.6 50 15.1 Average 50 17.0 for stress 50 16.1 <37 ksi 50 14.4 16.0 Overall average = 18.4

42 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 2024-2 Temperature combination, oF

212–300 300–350

300–400 350–400

400–500 500–600 500–550 550–600 600–650 650–700

Fig. 2024-1

Archival calculations of activation energy for Dorn-Sherby parameter of 2024-T851 plate Isostress, ksi

T1, oR

t1, h

T2, oR

t2, h

52.0 47.0 44.0 43.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 38.0 37.0 32.0 26.0 22.0 13.0 8.0 6.0 8.0 6.0 8.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

460 460 507 504 503 460 460 502 498 497 460 486 460 473 468 460 468 460 468 460 465 460

2665 94 365 560 870 870 34 156 220 970 320 771 82.5 594 2020 594 2020 85 304 139 435 433

460 460 554 825 1020 460 460 494 616 680 460 780 460 542.5 1054 460 1054 460 545 460 599 460

1.8 1.8 13 21 34 1.25 1.25 7.1 11 66 2 7.4 1 10.25 45 85 304 10.25 45 19 62 79.5

Activation energy ΔH

46,800 52,400 44,200 43,500 43,000 48,200 54,700 51,200 49,600 44,500 45,800 42,000 48,700 44,800 42,000 38,700 37,500 52,600 47,600 49,400 48,300 47,900 Overall average = 46,518

Stress rupture strengths of 2024-T851 plate at various temperatures. Stress versus rupture time. Broken lines represent extrapolations using LarsonMiller Parameter.

Data Sets / 43

Fig. 2024-2

Stress rupture strengths of 2024-T851 plate at various temperatures. Stress versus temperature

Fig. 2024-3

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 2024-T851. CLMP = 15.9

44 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 2024-4

Stress rupture strengths of 2024-T851 plate at various temperatures following LMP analysis. Stress versus rupture time. Broken lines represent extrapolations using Larson-Miller Parameter.

Data Sets / 45

Fig. 2024-5

Isostress plot of stress rupture strengths for 2024-T851 plate to determine Manson-Haferd constants. Ta = 45 °F; log ta = 10.3

46 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 2024-6

Archival Manson-Haferd parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 2024-T851. Ta = 45; log ta = 10.3

Fig. 2024-7

Archival Dorn-Sherby parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 2024-T851 (ΔH = 43,300)

Data Sets / 47

48 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 2024-8

Archival extrapolations of stress rupture strength to 100,000 h for 2024-T851 based on the LMP, MHP, and DSP relationships

Fig. 2024-9

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 2024-T851 plate with varying CLMP

Data Sets / 49

Fig. 2024-10

Semi-log Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 2024-T851 plate from archival data. CLMP = 18.4

50 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

2219-T6, T851 Table 2219-1 Test temperature o

F

o

R

450

910

550

1010

Stress rupture data for 2219-T851 plate with isostress calculations Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

30.0 26.0 23.0 18.0 14.0 20.0 18.0 15.0 14.0 12.5 10.0 7.5

0.95 9 62 430 7400 1.4 10 90 168 455 1250 5950

CLMP = 12.7 log t

–0.022 0.954 1.792 2.623 3.869 0.146 1.000 1.954 2.225 2.658 3.097 3.775

CLMP = 13.3

CLMP = 13.8

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C+log t

T(C + log t)

12.7 13.7 14.5 15.3 16.6 12.8 13.7 14.7 14.9 15.4 15.8 16.5

11,537 12,425 13,188 13,944 15,078 12,974 13,837 14,801 15,074 15,512 15,955 16,640

13.3 14.3 15.1 15.9 17.2 13.4 14.3 15.3 15.5 16.0 16.4 17.1

12,083 12,971 13,734 14,490 15,624 13,580 14,443 15,407 15,680 16,118 16,561 17,246

13.8 14.8 15.6 16.4 17.7 13.9 14.8 15.8 16.0 16.5 16.9 17.6

12,538 13,426 14,189 14,945 16,079 14,085 14,948 15,912 16,185 16,623 17,066 17,751

Isostress calculations for 2219-T851 plate Isostress, ksi

18.0 14.0

Temperature (T1)

Temperature (T2)

°F

°R

t1, h

log t1

T1 log t1

°F

°R

t2, h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

450 450

910 910

430 7400

2.623 3.869

2386.9 3520.8

550 550

1010 1010

10 168

1.000 2.225

1010.0 2247.3

1376.9 1273.5

T2 – T1

CLMP

100 100

13.8 12.7

CLMP avg

13.3

672

760

860

960

1,060

1,160

212

300

400

500

600

700

8.5 7.0 5.0 3.4 2.4

18.0 15.0 12.0 9.0 6.5

26.0 23.0 20.0 17.0 14.0

35.0 32.0 28.0 25.0 23.0

44.0 40.0 38.0 35.0 32.0

50.0 48.0 46.0 44.0 42.0

Applied stress, ksi

0.1 1 10 100 1000

0.1 1 10 100 1000

0.1 1 10 100 1000

0.1 1 10 100 1000

0.1 1 10 100 1000

0.1 1 10 100 1000

Rupture life (t), h

18,240 19,200 20,160 21,120 22,080 20,140 21,200 22,260 23,320 24,380 22,040 23,200 24,360 25,520 26,680

19.0 20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0 19.0 20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0 19.0 20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0 19.0 20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0

–1.000 0.000 1.000 2.000 3.000

–1.000 0.000 1.000 2.000 3.000

–1.000 0.000 1.000 2.000 3.000

–1.000 0.000 1.000 2.000 3.000

16,340 17,200 18,060 18,920 19,780

19.0 20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0

–1.000 0.000 1.000 2.000 3.000 14,440 15,200 15,960 16,720 17,480

12,768 13,440 14,112 14,784 15,456

19.0 20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0

–1.000 0.000 1.000 2.000 3.000

T(C + log t)

C + log t

log t

CLMP = 20

23.7 24.7 25.7 26.7 27.7

23.7 24.7 25.7 26.7 27.7

23.7 24.7 25.7 26.7 27.7

23.7 24.7 25.7 26.7 27.7

23.7 24.7 25.7 26.7 27.7

23.7 24.7 25.7 26.7 27.7

C + log t

27,492 28,652 29,812 30,972 32,132

25,122 26,182 27,242 28,302 29,362

22,752 23,712 24,672 25,632 26,592

20,382 21,242 22,102 22,962 23,822

18,012 18,772 19,532 20,292 21,052

15,926 16,598 17,270 17,942 18,614

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 24.7

24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 28.0

24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 28.0

24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 28.0

24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 28.0

24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 28.0

24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 28.0

C + log t

Stress rupture data for 2219-T6 forgings with isostress calculations and extrapolated stress rupture strengths

Forgings aged 14 h at 420 oF (215 oC)

°R

°F

Test temperature

Table 2219-2

27,840 29,000 30,160 31,320 32,480

25,440 26,500 27,560 28,620 29,680

23,040 24,000 24,960 25,920 26,880

20,640 21,500 22,360 23,220 24,080

18,240 19,000 19,760 20,520 21,280

16,128 16,800 17,472 18,144 18,816

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 25

Data Sets / 51

212 300 300 400 500 600

F

o

R

672 760 760 860 960 1060

o

Temperature (T1)

100 100 1000 1000 1000 1000

t1, h

2.000 2.000 3.000 3.000 3.000 3.000

log t1

R

672

760

860

960

1060

212

300

400

500

600

o

F

o

Test temperature

10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000

Rupture life (t), h

4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000

log t

Extrapolated long-life stress rupture strengths

44.0 35.0 32.0 23.0 14.0 6.5

Isostress ksi

Isostress calculations for 2219-T851 plate

24.0 25.0 24.0 25.0 24.0 25.0 24.0 25.0 24.0 25.0

C + log t

16,128 16,800 18,240 19,000 20,640 21,500 23,040 24,000 25,440 26,500

F

300 400 400 500 600 700

o

R

0.1 0.1 1 1 3 2

t2, h

38.0 35.0 27.5 24.0 18.0 15.0 10.0 7.0 3.9 2.9

Rupture stress, ksi

28.7 29.7 28.7 29.7 28.7 29.7 28.7 29.7 28.7 29.7

C + log t

From semilog plots, Fig. 2219-4

760 860 860 960 1060 1160

o

Temperature (T2)

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 20

1344.0 1520.0 2280.0 2580.0 2880.0 3180.0

T1 log t1

19,286 19,958 21,812 22,572 24,682 25,542 27,552 28,512 30,422 31,482

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 24.7

–1.000 –1.000 0.000 0.000 0.477 0.301

log t2

39.0 36.0 29.0 26.5 20.0 17.5 10.0 8.1 4.4 3.0

Rupture stress, ksi

–760.0 –860.0 0.0 0.0 505.6 349.2

T2 log t2

29.0 30.0 29.0 30.0 29.0 30.0 29.0 30.0 29.0 30.0

C + log t

CLMP

88 23.9 100 23.8 100 22.8 100 25.8 100 23.7 100 28.3 Overall average = 24.7

T2 – T1

19,488 20,160 22,040 22,800 24,940 25,800 27,840 28,800 30,740 31,800

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 25

39.0 36.8 29.5 27.0 20.2 17.5 11.2 8.5 3.8 2.8

Rupture stress, ksi

From Cartesian plot, Fig 2219-3

2104.0 2380.0 2280.0 2580.0 2374.4 2830.8

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2 )

52 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Data Sets / 53

Fig. 2219-1

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 2219-T851 plate from archival data. CLMP = 13.3

Fig 2219-2

Semilog Larson-Miller parametric master curve from Granta MI:Lab software for stress rupture strengths of 2219-T6 forgings. CLMP = 20

54 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Data Sets / 55

Fig. 2219-3

Semi-log Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 2219-T6 forgings from archival data. CLMP = 20 and 24.7

Fig. 2219-4

Cartesian Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 2219-T6 forgings from archival data. CLMP = 25

56 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

3003-O, H12, H14, H18 Table 3003-1 Stress rupture data for 3003 Alloy and temper

3003-O

3003-H12

Test temperature R

Testing source

Applied stress, ksi

212 212 212 212 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 350 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

672 672 672 672 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 810 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860

A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

13.0 12.0 10.0 9.0 10.0 10.0 8.0 7.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 7.3 7.5 6.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.0 3.4 3.0 3.0

0.47 3.6 135 730 0.783 0.58 14.2 27 312 634 2180 6 0.15 1.05 12.5 13 26 40.8 200 764 1877 2310

–0.328 0.556 2.130 2.863 –0.106 –0.237 1.152 1.431 2.494 2.802 3.338 0.778 –0.824 0.021 1.097 1.114 1.415 1.611 2.301 2.883 3.273 3.364

500 500 212 212 212 212 212 212 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

960 960 672 672 672 672 672 672 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860

A A A B B B A A B B A A A B B A A A A A A A A B B B A A B A A B A A

3.0 2.0 17.0 17.0 16.5 16.0 14.0 13.0 14.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 11.5 11.0 10.5 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 10.0 10.0 8.0 7.5 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0

21.1 1112 0.083 1.45 14.2 67.2 35.5 322 0.15 1.44 27.7 3.35 3.75 161 946 16 34 115 235 464 1037 849 0.25 0.82 15.8 8.5 12 20 88.5 54 142 624 250 504

1.324 3.046 –1.081 0.161 1.152 1.827 1.550 2.508 –0.824 0.158 1.442 0.525 0.574 2.207 2.976 1.204 1.531 2.061 2.371 2.667 3.015 2.929 –0.602 –0.086 1.199 0.929 1.079 1.301 1.947 1.732 2.152 2.795 2.398 2.702

o

F

o

Rupture life (t), h

CLMP = 15.0 log t

C + log t

14.7 15.6 17.1 17.9 14.9 14.8 16.2 16.4 17.5 17.8 18.3 15.8 14.2 15.0 16.1 16.1 16.4 16.6 17.3 17.9 18.3 18.4 15.0 16.3 18.0 13.9 15.2 16.2 16.8 16.6 17.5 14.2 15.2 16.4 15.5 15.6 17.2 18.0 16.2 16.5 17.1 17.4 17.7 18.0 17.9 14.4 14.9 16.2 15.9 16.1 16.3 16.9 16.7 17.2 17.8 17.4 17.7

(continued)

CLMP = 16.6

CLMP = 20.1

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

9860 10,454 11,511 12,004 11,319 11,220 12,276 12,488 13,295 13,530 13,937 12,780 12,191 12,918 13,843 13,858 14,117 14,285 14,879 15,379 15,715 15,793 0 15,671 17,324 9354 10,188 10,854 11,308 11,122 11,765 10,774 11,520 12,496 11,799 11,836 13,077 13,662 12,315 12,564 12,966 13,202 13,427 13,691 13,626 12,382 12,826 13,931 13,699 13,828 14,019 14,574 14,390 14,751 15,304 14,962 15,224

16.3 17.2 18.7 19.5 16.5 16.4 17.8 18.0 19.1 19.4 19.9 17.4 15.8 16.6 17.7 17.7 18.0 18.2 18.9 19.5 19.9 20.0 16.6 17.9 19.6 15.5 16.8 17.8 18.4 18.2 19.1 15.8 16.8 18.0 17.1 17.2 18.8 19.6 17.8 18.1 18.7 19.0 19.3 19.6 19.5 16.0 16.5 17.8 17.5 17.7 17.9 18.5 18.3 18.8 19.4 19.0 19.3

10,935 11,529 12,587 13,079 12,535 12,436 13,492 13,704 14,511 14,746 15,153 14,076 13,567 14,294 15,219 15,234 15,493 15,661 16,255 16,755 17,091 17,169 0 17,207 18,860 10,429 11,263 11,929 12,383 12,197 12,841 11,990 12,736 13,712 13,015 13,052 14,293 14,878 13,531 13,780 14,182 14,418 14,643 14,907 14,842 13,758 14,202 15,307 15,075 15,204 15,395 15,950 15,766 16,127 16,680 16,338 16,600

19.8 20.7 22.2 23.0 20.0 19.9 21.3 21.5 22.6 22.9 23.4 20.9 19.3 20.1 21.2 21.2 21.5 21.7 22.4 23.0 23.4 23.5 20.1 21.4 23.1 19.0 20.3 21.3 21.9 21.7 22.6 19.3 20.3 21.5 20.6 20.7 22.3 23.1 21.3 21.6 22.2 22.5 22.8 23.1 23.0 19.5 20.0 21.3 21.0 21.2 21.4 22.0 21.8 22.3 22.9 22.5 22.8

13,287 13,881 14,939 15,431 15,195 15,096 16,152 16,364 17,171 17,406 17,813 16,911 16,577 17,304 18,229 18,244 18,503 18,671 19,265 19,765 20,101 20,179 0 20,567 22,220 12,781 13,615 14,281 14,735 14,549 15,193 14,650 15,396 16,372 15,675 15,712 16,953 17,538 16,191 16,440 16,842 17,078 17,303 17,567 17,502 16,768 17,212 18,317 18,085 18,214 18,405 18,960 18,776 19,137 19,690 19,348 19,610

Data Sets / 57 Table 3003-1 Alloy and temper

3003-H14

3003-H18

(continued)

Test temperature R

Testing source

Applied stress, ksi

212 212 212 212 212

672 672 672 672 672

A A A A A

20.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 15.0

0.17 18.8 20 234 354

–0.770 1.274 1.301 2.369 2.549

300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760

A A A A A A A A A A

15.0 15.0 15.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 10.0

0.67 0.73 0.92 6.2 12 62 74 192 208 255

400 400 400

860 860 860

A A A

6.0 6.0 5.0

500 500

960 960

A A

212 212 212 212 212 212 212

672 672 672 672 672 672 672

300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

o

F

o

Rupture life (t), h

CLMP = 15.0 log t

C + log t

CLMP = 16.6

CLMP = 20.1

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

14.2 16.3 16.3 17.4 17.5

9563 10,936 10,954 11,672 11,793

15.8 17.9 17.9 19.0 19.1

10,638 12,011 12,029 12,747 12,868

19.3 21.4 21.4 22.5 22.6

12,990 14,363 14,381 15,099 15,220

–0.174 –0.137 –0.036 0.792 1.079 1.792 1.869 2.283 2.318 2.407

14.8 14.9 15.0 15.8 16.1 16.8 16.9 17.3 17.3 17.4

11,268 11,296 11,373 12,002 12,220 12,762 12,820 13,135 13,162 13,229

16.4 16.5 16.6 17.4 17.7 18.4 18.5 18.9 18.9 19.0

12,484 12,512 12,589 13,218 13,436 13,978 14,036 14,351 14,378 14,445

19.9 20.0 20.1 20.9 21.2 21.9 22.0 22.4 22.4 22.5

15,144 15,172 15,249 15,878 16,096 16,638 16,696 17,011 17,038 17,105

12.6 51 741

1.100 1.708 2.870

4.0 3.0

17.25 181

1.237 2.258

16.1 16.7 17.9 15.0 16.2 17.3

13,846 14,369 15,368 0 15,588 16,568

17.7 18.3 19.5 16.6 17.8 18.9

15,222 15,745 16,744 0 17,124 18,104

21.2 21.8 23.0 20.1 21.3 22.4

18,232 18,755 19,754 0 20,484 21,464

A A A A A A A

28.0 23.0 23.0 21.0 21.0 20.5 20.0

0.015 2.58 12.4 126 159 659 339

–1.824 0.412 1.093 2.100 2.201 2.819 2.530

13.2 15.4 16.1 17.1 17.2 17.8 17.5

8854 10,357 10,814 11,491 11,559 11,974 11,780

14.8 17.0 17.7 18.7 18.8 19.4 19.1

9929 11,432 11,890 12,566 12,634 13,050 12,855

18.3 20.5 21.2 22.2 22.3 22.9 22.6

12,281 13,784 14,242 14,918 14,986 15,402 15,207

760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760

B B A A A B B A A A A A A A A A A

23.0 22.0 20.0 19.0 17.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 15.6 15.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 9.8

0.06 0.185 0.9 2.35 16.9 6.1 23.2 62 60.4 14 158 591 65 100 545 454 1390

–1.222 –0.733 –0.046 0.371 1.228 0.785 1.365 1.792 1.781 1.146 2.199 2.772 1.813 2.000 2.736 2.657 3.143

13.8 14.3 15.0 15.4 16.2 15.8 16.4 16.8 16.8 16.1 17.2 17.8 16.8 17.0 17.7 17.7 18.1

10,471 10,843 11,365 11,682 12,333 11,997 12,437 12,762 12,754 12,271 13,071 13,507 12,778 12,920 13,479 13,419 13,789

15.4 15.9 16.6 17.0 17.8 17.4 18.0 18.4 18.4 17.7 18.8 19.4 18.4 18.6 19.3 19.3 19.7

11,687 12,059 12,581 12,898 13,549 13,213 13,653 13,978 13,970 13,487 14,287 14,723 13,994 14,136 14,695 14,635 15,005

18.9 19.4 20.1 20.5 21.3 20.9 21.5 21.9 21.9 21.2 22.3 22.9 21.9 22.1 22.8 22.8 23.2

14,347 14,719 15,241 15,558 16,209 15,873 16,313 16,638 16,630 16,147 16,947 17,383 16,654 16,796 17,355 17,295 17,665

860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860

A A B A B A B A B A A A A A

13.0 10.0 10.0 9.0 9.0 8.5 8.0 7.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 5.8 5.2

0.5 6 13 8.5 60.6 16 199 35 737 110 85 328 286 863

–0.301 0.778 1.114 0.929 1.782 1.204 2.299 1.544 2.867 2.041 1.929 2.516 2.456 2.936

14.7 15.8 16.1 15.9 16.8 16.2 17.3 16.5 17.9 17.0 16.9 17.5 17.5 17.9

12,641 13,569 13,858 13,699 14,433 13,935 14,877 14,228 15,366 14,655 14,559 15,064 15,012 15,425

16.3 17.4 17.7 17.5 18.4 17.8 18.9 18.1 19.5 18.6 18.5 19.1 19.1 19.5

14,017 14,945 15,234 15,075 15,809 15,311 16,253 15,604 16,742 16,031 15,935 16,440 16,388 16,801

19.8 20.9 21.2 21.0 21.9 21.3 22.4 21.6 23.0 22.1 22.0 22.6 22.6 23.0

17,027 17,955 18,244 18,085 18,819 18,321 19,263 18,614 19,752 19,041 18,945 19,450 19,398 19,811

58 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 3003-2 Alloy and temper

Isostress calculations for 3003-O, H12, H14, and H18

Isostress, ksi

Temperature (T1) °F °R

t2, h

log t2

212 212 300 300 400 400

672 672 760 760 860 860

135 730 27 2180 1877 2310

2.130 2.863 1.431 3.338 3.273 3.364

1431.4 1923.9 1087.6 2536.9 2814.8 2893.0

300 300 400 400 500 500

760 760 860 860 960 960

0.68 4 0.15 12.8 21.1 21.1

–0.168 0.602 –0.824 1.106 1.324 1.324

–127.7 457.5 –708.6 951.2 1271.0 1271.0

1559.0 1466.4 1796.2 1585.7 1543.7 1622.0

88 88 100 100 100 100

17.7 16.7 18.0 15.9 15.4 16.2

14.0 14.0 13.0 10.0 10.0 8.0 8.0

212 212 212 300 300 300 300

672 672 672 760 760 760 760

35.5 35.5 322 70 70 1037 849

1.550 1.550 2.508 1.845 1.845 3.015 2.929

1041.6 1041.6 1685.4 1402.2 1402.2 2291.4 2226.0

300 300 300 400 400 400 400

760 760 760 860 860 860 860

0.15 1.44 27.7 0.25 0.82 12.8 12.8

–0.824 0.158 1.442 –0.602 –0.086 1.106 1.106

–626.2 120.1 1095.9 –517.7 –74.0 951.2 951.2

1667.8 921.5 589.5 1919.9 1476.2 1340.2 1274.9

88 88 88 100 100 100 100

19.0 10.5 6.7 19.2 14.8 13.4 12.7

3003-H14

15.0 5.0

212 400

672 860

354 741

2.549 2.549

1712.9 2192.1

300 500

760 960

0.77 1.75

–0.114 0.230

–86.6 220.8

1799.6 1971.3

88 100

20.4 19.7

3003-H18

23.0 23.0 20.0 13.0 13.0

212 212 212 300 300

672 672 672 760 760

2.58 12.4 339 65 100

0.412 1.093 2.530 1.813 2.000

276.9 734.5 1700.2 1377.9 1520.0

300 300 300 400 400

760 760 760 860 860

0.06 0.68 0.68 0.5 0.82

–1.222 –1.222 0.900 –0.301 –0.301

–928.7 –928.7 0.0 –258.9 –258.9

1205.6 1663.2 1700.2 1636.7 1778.9

88 88 88 100 100

13.7 18.9 19.3 16.4 17.8

3003-H12

log t1

T1 log t1

Temperature (T2) °F °R

10.0 9.0 7.5 5.0 3.0 3.0

3003-O

t1, h

T2 log t2 (T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2) T2 – T1

CLMP

CLMP avg

Average 3003-O 16.6 (a) Average 3003-H12 14.9 Average 3003-H14 20.1

Average 3003-H18 17.2 Overall average = 16.6

(a) Omitted from calculations, appears to be outlier

Table 3003-3

Effect of LMP constant value on long-time extrapolated stresses for 3003-O CLMP = 16.0

Desired extrapolation Temperature (T) °F

Time (t)

°R

yr

h

log t

C + log t

T (C + log t)

200

660

250

710

300

760

350

810

400

860

20 50 20 50 20 50 20 50 20 50

175,000 440,000 175,000 440,000 175,000 440,000 175,000 440,000 175,000 440,000

5.243 5.643 5.243 5.643 5.243 5.643 5.243 5.643 5.243 5.643

21.2 21.6 21.2 21.6 21.2 21.6 21.2 21.6 21.2 21.6

14,020 14,284 15,083 15,367 16,145 16,449 17,207 17,531 18,269 18,613

CLMP = 17.51 Extrapolated stress, ksi

6.0 5.6 4.5 4.2 3.4 3.2 2.6 2.4 2.0 1.9

Note: 175,000 h = ~20 yr; 440,000 h = ~50 yr

Fig. 3003-1 Stress rupture strengths of 3003-O products at various temperatures. Stress versus rupture time

C + log t

T (C + log t)

22.8 23.2 22.6 23.0 22.8 23.2 22.8 23.2 22.8 23.2

15,017 15,281 16,077 16,361 17,292 17,596 18,430 18,754 19,568 19,912

Extrapolated stress, ksi

6.2 5.7 4.8 4.5 3.6 3.3 2.7 2.5 2.1 1.9

Data Sets / 59

Fig. 3003-2

Stress rupture strengths of 3003-O products at various temperatures. Stress versus temperature

Fig. 3003-3

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3003-O products. CLMP = 16.0

60 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3003-O products. CLMP = 17.51

Rupture time, h

Fig. 3003-4

105

104 Rupture stress 103 2 ksi 10

2

101 10 ksi

8

6

4

3

1.0

0.1

0.01 -200

Fig. 3003-5

-100

0

100

200 300 Temperature, °F

400

500

600

700

Time-temperature plot of stress rupture strengths for 3003-O products to determine Manson-Haferd constants

Data Sets / 61

Fig. 3003-6

Archival Manson-Haferd parameter master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3003-O products. TA = –230; log tA = 14

Fig. 3003-7

Archival Dorn-Sherby parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3003-O products. ΔH= 35,000

62 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 3003-8

Extrapolations of stress rupture strength to 100,000 h for 3003-O products based on the LMP, MHP, and DSP relationships

Fig. 3003-9

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3003-H12 rolled and drawn rod. CLMP = 19.1

Fig. 3003-10

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3003-H14 rolled and drawn rod. CLMP = 20.5

Data Sets / 63

Fig. 3003-11

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3003-H18 rolled and drawn rod. CLMP = 20.1

Fig. 3003-12

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3003-O, 3003-H12, 3003-H14, and 3003-H18 rolled and drawn rod. CLMP = 16.6

3004-H38

3004-H18

3004-H34

3004-H14

3004-H32

3004-O

Alloy and temper

300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 500 212 212 300 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 300 300 400 400 400 300 400 400 400 300 300 400 400 500 500 500 212 212 212 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400

°F

760 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 960 672 672 760 760 760 760 760 860 860 860 760 760 860 860 860 760 860 860 860 760 760 860 860 1060 1060 1060 672 672 672 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 860

°R

Test temperature

20.0 18.0 15.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 30.0 28.0 24.0 22.0 19.5 15.0 12.0 10.0 9.0 7.0 22.5 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 25.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 20.0 17.0 10.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 42.5 39.0 36.0 30.0 25.0 21.0 20.0 17.0 15.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0

Applied stress, ksi

Table 3004-1 Stress rupture data for 3004

3004-O, H32, H34, H38

6.33 117 873 16 40 133 344 1202 86 10.89 73.6 2.84 22.4 100 334 1056 25.4 51.9 405.5 19.5 5024 69 143 729 4 75 241 522 105 250 22 267 7 18 87 5.07 109.5 472 2.33 28.5 71.5 81.0 228 291 766 6.85 30 43 59 192 475

Rupture life (t ), h

0.794 2.104 2.941 1.204 1.602 2.124 2.537 3.080 1.935 1.039 1.867 0.453 1.350 2.000 2.524 3.023 1.405 1.715 2.608 1.290 3.701 1.839 2.155 2.863 0.602 1.875 2.382 2.718 2.021 2.398 1.342 2.427 0.845 1.255 1.940 0.705 2.039 2.674 0.367 1.455 1.851 1.908 2.358 2.464 2.884 0.836 1.477 1.633 1.771 2.283 2.677

log t

(continued)

17.8 19.1 19.9 18.2 18.6 19.1 19.5 20.1 18.9 18.0 18.9 17.5 18.4 19.0 19.5 20.0 18.4 18.7 19.6 18.3 20.7 18.8 19.2 19.9 17.6 18.9 19.4 19.7 19.0 19.4 18.3 19.4 17.8 18.3 18.9 17.7 19.0 19.7 17.4 18.5 18.9 18.9 19.4 19.5 19.9 17.8 18.5 18.6 18.8 19.3 19.7

13,523 14,519 15,155 15,655 15,998 16,447 16,802 17,269 18,178 12,122 12,679 13,264 13,946 14,440 14,838 15,217 15,828 16,095 16,863 13,900 15,733 16,202 16,473 17,082 13,378 16,233 16,669 16,957 14,456 14,742 15,774 16,707 18,916 19,350 20,076 11,898 12,794 13,221 13,199 14,026 14,327 14,370 14,712 14,793 15,112 15,339 15,890 16,024 16,143 16,583 16,922

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 17.0 C + log t

20.8 22.1 22.9 21.2 21.6 22.1 22.5 23.1 21.9 21.0 21.9 20.5 21.4 22.0 22.5 23.0 21.4 21.7 22.6 21.3 23.7 21.8 22.2 22.9 20.6 21.9 22.4 22.7 22.0 22.4 21.3 22.4 20.8 21.3 21.9 20.7 22.0 22.7 20.4 21.5 21.9 21.9 22.4 22.5 22.9 20.8 21.5 21.6 21.8 22.3 22.7

C + log t

15,803 16,799 17,435 18,235 18,578 19,027 19,382 19,849 21,058 14,138 14,695 15,544 16,226 16,720 17,118 17,497 18,408 18,675 19,443 16,180 18,013 18,782 19,053 19,662 15,658 18,813 19,249 19,537 16,736 17,022 18,354 19,287 22,096 22,530 23,256 13,914 14,810 15,237 15,479 16,306 16,607 16,650 16,992 17,073 17,392 17,919 18,470 18,604 18,723 19,163 19,502

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 20

24.8 26.1 26.9 25.2 25.6 26.1 26.5 27.1 25.9 25.0 25.9 24.5 25.4 26.0 26.5 27.0 25.4 25.7 26.6 25.3 27.7 25.8 26.2 26.9 24.6 25.9 26.4 26.7 26.0 26.4 25.3 26.4 24.8 25.3 25.9 24.7 26.0 26.7 24.4 25.5 25.9 25.9 26.4 26.5 26.9 24.8 25.5 25.6 25.8 26.3 26.7

C + log t

18,843 19,839 20,475 21,675 22,018 22,467 22,822 23,289 24,898 16,826 17,383 18,584 19,266 19,760 20,158 20,537 21,848 22,115 22,883 19,220 21,053 22,222 22,493 23,102 18,698 22,253 22,689 22,977 19,776 20,062 21,794 22,727 26,336 26,770 27,496 16,602 17,498 17,925 18,519 19,346 19,647 19,690 20,032 20,113 20,432 21,359 21,910 22,044 22,163 22,603 22,942

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 24

64 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

300 300 300 300 400 400 300 300 400 400

°F

760 760 760 760 860 860 760 760 860 860

°R

Test temperature

(continued)

Note: All other tempers show good agreement.

3004-H39

3004-H19

Alloy and temper

Table 3004-1

20.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 10.0 6.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 6.0

Applied stress, ksi

113 422 465 499 21 447 98 473 21 400

Rupture life (t ), h

2.053 2.625 2.667 2.698 1.322 2.650 1.991 2.675 1.322 2.602

log t

19.1 19.6 19.7 19.7 18.3 19.7 19.0 19.7 18.3 19.6

14,480 14,915 14,947 14,970 15,757 16,899 14,433 14,953 15,757 16,858

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 17.0 C + log t

22.1 22.6 22.7 22.7 21.3 22.7 22.0 22.7 21.3 22.6

C + log t

16,760 17,195 17,227 17,250 18,337 19,479 16,713 17,233 18,337 19,438

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 20

26.1 26.6 26.7 26.7 25.3 26.7 26.0 26.7 25.3 26.6

C + log t

19,800 20,235 20,267 20,290 21,777 22,919 19,753 20,273 21,777 22,878

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 24

Data Sets / 65

66 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 3004-1

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3004-O products. CLMP = 17.1

Fig. 3004-2

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3004-H32 products. CLMP = 23.2

Data Sets / 67

Fig. 3004-3

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3004-H38 products. CLMP = 24.1

Fig. 3004-4

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 3004-O, 3004-H32, and 3004-H38 products. CLMP = 20

68 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

5050-O Table 5050-1 Test temperature o

o

F

R

300

760

400

860

500

960

600

1,060

Stress rupture data for 5050-O and isostress calculations CLMP = 18.5

CLMP = 19.0

CLMP = 19.8

Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t),

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

0.45 1.4 4 12 32 88 280 860 0.15 0.47 1.3 3.2 7 16 39 110 350 0.18 0.75 3.2 13 0.038 0.23 1.8

–0.347 0.146 0.602 1.079 1.505 1.944 2.447 2.934 –0.824 –0.328 0.114 0.505 0.845 1.204 1.591 2.141 2.544 –0.745 –0.125 0.505 1.114 –1.420 –0.638 0.255

18.2 18.6 19.1 19.6 20.0 20.4 20.9 21.4 17.7 18.2 18.6 19.0 19.3 19.7 20.1 20.6 21.0 17.8 18.4 19.0 19.6 17.1 17.9 18.8

13,796 14,171 14,518 14,880 15,204 15,537 15,920 16,290 15,201 15,628 16,008 16,344 16,637 16,945 17,278 17,751 18,098 17,045 17,640 18,245 18,829 18,105 18,934 19,880

18.7 19.1 19.6 20.1 20.5 20.9 21.4 21.9 18.2 18.7 19.1 19.5 19.8 20.2 20.6 21.1 21.5 18.3 18.9 19.5 20.1 17.6 18.4 19.3

14,176 14,551 14,898 15,260 15,584 15,917 16,300 16,670 15,631 16,058 16,438 16,774 17,067 17,375 17,708 18,181 18,528 17,525 18,120 18,725 19,309 18,635 19,464 20,410

19.5 19.9 20.4 20.9 21.3 21.7 22.2 22.7 19.0 19.5 19.9 20.3 20.6 21.0 21.4 21.9 22.3 19.1 19.7 20.3 20.9 18.4 19.2 20.1

14,784 15,159 15,506 15,868 16,192 16,525 16,908 17,278 16,319 16,746 17,126 17,462 17,755 18,063 18,396 18,869 19,216 18,293 18,888 19,493 20,077 19,483 20,312 21,258

Isostress calculation for 5050-O Isostress, ksi

13.0 12.0 11.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0

Temperature (T1)

Temperature (T2)

o

o

t1, h

log t1

T1 log t1

o

300 300 300 400 400 400 400 500 500

760 760 760 860 860 860 860 960 960

88 280 860 39 110 350 350 3.2 13

1.944 2.447 2.934 1.591 2.141 2.544 2.544 0.505 1.114

1477.4 1859.7 2229.8 1368.3 1841.3 2187.8 2187.8 484.8 1069.4

400 400 400 500 500 500 600 600 600

F

R

F

R

t2 h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

CLMP

860 860 860 960 960 960 1060 1060 1060

0.15 0.47 1.3 0.18 0.75 3.2 0.038 0.038 0.23

–0.824 –0.328 0.114 –0.745 –0.125 0.505 –1.420 –1.420 –0.638

–708.6 –282.1 98.0 –715.2 –120.0 484.8 –1505.2 –1505.2 –676.3

2186.1 2141.8 2131.8 2083.5 1961.3 1703.0 3693.0 1990.0 1745.7

100 100 100 100 100 100 200 100 100

21.9 21.4 21.3 20.8 19.6 17.0 18.5 19.9 17.5

o

CLMP avg

Average 5050-O 19.8

Data Sets / 69

Fig. 5050-1

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5050-O products. CLMP = 19.0

70 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

5052-O, H32, H34, H38, and H112 Table 5052-1 Alloy and temper

5052-O

5052-H32

Stress rupture data for 5052-O, H34, H38, and H112

Test temperature o

F

212 212 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 600 600 600 212 212 212 212 212 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 400

R

Testing source

Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

672 672 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 1060 1060 1060 672 672 672 672 672 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 860

A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A B B B B A A B A A B A B A B A A A

26.0 20.0 21.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 13.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 9.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 28.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 20.0 26.0 25.0 21.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 15.0 14.0 12.5 12.5 12.0 20.0

2.5 312 0.38 0.92 1.2 3.3 7.8 9.1 26 65 146 178 180 380 740 742 0.78 0.78 1 2 4.2 8.6 19 18 26 42 85 62 124 190 117 440 720 1300 7000 0.63 0.63 0.45 1.1 2 3 3.9 8 22 100 5.5 30 450 70.2 284 527 819 548 0.2 2.22 7.5 23.8 70.9 69 270 397 839 1190 1646 0.1

o

CLMP = 16.0 log t

0.398 2.494 –0.430 –0.041 0.079 0.519 0.892 0.959 1.415 1.813 2.164 2.255 2.255 2.580 2.869 2.870 –0.108 –0.108 0.000 0.301 0.623 0.934 1.279 1.255 1.415 1.623 1.929 1.792 2.093 2.279 2.068 2.643 2.857 3.114 3.845 –0.201 –0.201 –0.347 0.041 0.301 0.477 0.591 0.903 1.342 2.000 0.740 1.477 2.653 1.846 2.453 2.722 2.913 2.739 –0.691 0.346 0.875 1.377 1.851 1.839 2.431 2.599 2.924 3.076 3.216 –1.000 (continued)

CLMP = 17

CLMP = 18

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

16.4 18.5 15.6 16.0 16.1 16.5 16.9 17.0 17.4 17.8 18.2 18.3 18.3 18.6 18.9 18.9 15.9 15.9 16.0 16.3 16.6 16.9 17.3 17.3 17.4 17.6 17.9 17.8 18.1 18.3 18.1 18.6 18.9 19.1 19.8 15.8 15.8 15.7 16.0 16.3 16.5 16.6 16.9 17.3 18.0 16.7 17.5 18.7 17.8 18.5 18.7 18.9 18.7 15.3 16.3 16.9 17.4 17.9 17.8 18.4 18.6 18.9 19.1 19.2 15.0

11,019 12,428 11,833 12,129 12,220 12,554 12,838 12,889 13,235 13,538 13,805 13,874 13,874 14,121 14,340 14,341 13,667 13,667 13,760 14,019 14,296 14,563 14,860 14,839 14,977 15,156 15,419 15,301 15,560 15,720 15,538 16,033 16,217 16,438 17,067 15,167 15,167 15,027 15,399 15,649 15,818 15,927 16,227 16,648 17,280 17,744 18,526 19,772 11,993 12,400 12,581 12,710 12,593 11,635 12,423 12,825 13,207 13,567 13,558 14,008 14,135 14,382 14,498 14,604 12,900

17.4 19.5 16.6 17.0 17.1 17.5 17.9 18.0 18.4 18.8 19.2 19.3 19.3 19.6 19.9 19.9 16.9 16.9 17.0 17.3 17.6 17.9 18.3 18.3 18.4 18.6 18.9 18.8 19.1 19.3 19.1 19.6 19.9 20.1 20.8 16.8 16.8 16.7 17.0 17.3 17.5 17.6 17.9 18.3 19.0 17.7 18.5 19.7 18.8 19.5 19.7 19.9 19.7 16.3 17.3 17.9 18.4 18.9 18.8 19.4 19.6 19.9 20.1 20.2 16.0

11,691 13,100 12,593 12,889 12,980 13,314 13,598 13,649 13,995 14,298 14,565 14,634 14,634 14,881 15,100 15,101 14,527 14,527 14,620 14,879 15,156 15,423 15,720 15,699 15,837 16,016 16,279 16,161 16,420 16,580 16,398 16,893 17,077 17,298 17,927 16,127 16,127 15,987 16,359 16,609 16,778 16,887 17,187 17,608 18,240 18,804 19,586 20,832 12,665 13,072 13,253 13,382 13,265 12,395 13,183 13,585 13,967 14,327 14,318 14,768 14,895 15,142 15,258 15,364 13,760

18.4 20.5 17.6 18.0 18.1 18.5 18.9 19.0 19.4 19.8 20.2 20.3 20.3 20.6 20.9 20.9 17.9 17.9 18.0 18.3 18.6 18.9 19.3 19.3 19.4 19.6 19.9 19.8 20.1 20.3 20.1 20.6 20.9 21.1 21.8 17.8 17.8 17.7 18.0 18.3 18.5 18.6 18.9 19.3 20.0 18.7 19.5 20.7 19.8 20.5 20.7 20.9 20.7 17.3 18.3 18.9 19.4 19.9 19.8 20.4 20.6 20.9 21.1 21.2 17.0

T(C + log t)

12,363 13,772 13,353 13,649 13,740 14,074 14,358 14,409 14,755 15,058 15,325 15,394 15,394 15,641 15,860 15,861 15,387 15,387 15,480 15,739 16,016 16,283 16,580 16,559 16,697 16,876 17,139 17,021 17,280 17,440 17,258 17,753 17,937 18,158 18,787 17,087 17,087 16,947 17,319 17,569 17,738 17,847 18,147 18,568 19,200 19,864 20,646 21,892 13,337 13,744 13,925 14,054 13,937 13,155 13,943 14,345 14,727 15,087 15,078 15,528 15,655 15,902 16,018 16,124 14,620

Data Sets / 71 Table 5052-1 Alloy and temper

5052-H34

5052-H38

5052-H112

(continued)

Test temperature o

F

400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 300 300 300 400 400 400 600 600 600 212 212 212 212 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 300 300 400 400 400

CLMP = 16.0

R

Testing source

Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 760 760 760 860 860 860 1060 1060 1060 672 672 672 672 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 760 760 860 860 860

B A A B A A A A A A A A A A A A A B B B B A A A B B A A B A A B A A B A A A B A A A A A B B A A A A A A

15.0 13.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 18.0 10.0 7.0 4.0 3.0 1.8 35.0 30.0 28.0 26.5 30.0 30.0 25.0 23.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 18.0 18.0 16.0 15.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 13.0 22.0 20.0 15.0 15.0 10.0 9.5 8.5 8.1 8.0 7.0 7.0 20.0 18.0 20.0 14.0 10.0

2.28 7 24.8 30 40 89.5 215 515 6.75 67 755 0.633 46 575 5.5 30 1040 9.61 143 452 638 0.52 1.88 5.5 13.8 48 52 82.5 102 115 306 346 543 890 875 1656 0.18 0.56 3.2 4.6 49 94 228 265 139 236 371 34 300 0.1 12.5 102

0.358 0.845 1.394 1.477 1.602 1.952 2.332 2.712 0.829 1.826 2.878 –0.199 1.663 2.760 0.740 1.477 3.017 0.983 2.155 2.655 2.805 –0.284 0.274 0.740 1.140 1.681 1.716 1.916 2.009 2.061 2.487 2.539 2.734 2.949 2.942 3.216 –0.745 –0.252 0.505 0.663 1.690 1.973 2.358 2.432 2.143 2.373 2.569 1.531 2.477 –1.000 1.097 2.009

16.4 16.8 17.4 17.5 17.6 18.0 18.3 18.7 16.8 17.8 18.9 15.8 17.7 18.8 16.7 17.5 19.0 17.0 18.2 18.7 18.8 15.7 16.3 16.7 17.1 17.7 17.7 17.9 18.0 18.1 18.5 18.5 18.7 18.9 18.9 19.2 15.3 15.7 16.5 16.7 17.7 18.0 18.4 18.4 18.1 18.4 18.6 17.5 18.5 15.0 17.1 18.0

14,068 14,487 14,959 15,030 15,138 15,439 15,766 16,092 12,790 13,548 14,347 13,589 15,190 16,134 17,744 18,526 20,158 11,413 12,200 12,536 12,637 11,944 12,368 12,722 13,026 13,438 13,464 13,616 13,687 13,726 14,050 14,090 14,238 14,401 14,396 14,604 13,119 13,543 14,194 14,330 15,213 15,457 15,788 15,852 15,603 15,801 15,969 13,324 14,043 12,900 14,703 15,488

o

CLMP = 17 C + log t T(C + log t)

17.4 17.8 18.4 18.5 18.6 19.0 19.3 19.7 17.8 18.8 19.9 16.8 18.7 19.8 17.7 18.5 20.0 18.0 19.2 19.7 19.8 16.7 17.3 17.7 18.1 18.7 18.7 18.9 19.0 19.1 19.5 19.5 19.7 19.9 19.9 20.2 16.3 16.7 17.5 17.7 18.7 19.0 19.4 19.4 19.1 19.4 19.6 18.5 19.5 16.0 18.1 19.0

14,928 15,347 15,819 15,890 15,998 16,299 16,626 16,952 13,550 14,308 15,107 14,449 16,050 16,994 18,804 19,586 21,218 12,085 12,872 13,208 13,309 12,704 13,128 13,482 13,786 14,198 14,224 14,376 14,447 14,486 14,810 14,850 14,998 15,161 15,156 15,364 13,979 14,403 15,054 15,190 16,073 16,317 16,648 16,712 16,463 16,661 16,829 14,084 14,803 13,760 15,563 16,348

CLMP = 18 C + log t T(C + log t)

18.4 18.8 19.4 19.5 19.6 20.0 20.3 20.7 18.8 19.8 20.9 17.8 19.7 20.8 18.7 19.5 21.0 19.0 20.2 20.7 20.8 17.7 18.3 18.7 19.1 19.7 19.7 19.9 20.0 20.1 20.5 20.5 20.7 20.9 20.9 21.2 17.3 17.7 18.5 18.7 19.7 20.0 20.4 20.4 20.1 20.4 20.6 19.5 20.5 17.0 19.1 20.0

15,788 16,207 16,679 16,750 16,858 17,159 17,486 17,812 14,310 15,068 15,867 15,309 16,910 17,854 19,864 20,646 22,278 12,757 13,544 13,880 13,981 13,464 13,888 14,242 14,546 14,958 14,984 15,136 15,207 15,246 15,570 15,610 15,758 15,921 15,916 16,124 14,839 15,263 15,914 16,050 16,933 17,177 17,508 17,572 17,323 17,521 17,689 14,844 15,563 14,620 16,423 17,208

72 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 5052-2 Test temperature °F

°R

212 300

672 760

400

860

500

960

600

1060

700

1160

Stress rupture data for 5052-H112 as-welded with 5052 filler wire CLMP = 16.0

CLMP = 17

CLMP = 18

Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

26.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0

10 0.15 0.67 2.6 9 30 78 185 370 680 1316 0.5 1.8 4.8 11.5 21.5 33 49 73 130 270 730 2145 5600 16,000 27,640 193 481 11 56 370 497

1.000 –0.824 –0.174 0.415 0.954 1.477 1.892 2.267 2.568 2.833 3.119 –0.301 0.255 0.681 1.061 1.332 1.519 1.690 1.863 2.114 2.431 2.863 3.231 3.748 4.204 4.442 2.286 2.682 1.041 1.748 2.568 2.696

17.0 15.2 15.8 16.4 17.0 17.5 17.9 18.3 18.6 18.8 19.1 15.7 16.3 16.7 17.1 17.3 17.5 17.7 17.9 18.1 18.4 18.9 19.2 19.7 20.2 20.4 18.3 18.7 17.0 17.7 18.6 18.7

11,424 11,534 12,028 12,475 12,885 13,283 13,598 13,883 14,112 14,313 14,530 13,501 13,979 14,346 14,672 14,906 15,066 15,213 15,362 15,578 15,851 16,222 16,539 16,983 17,375 17,580 17,555 17,935 18,063 18,813 19,682 21,687

18.0 16.2 16.8 17.4 18.0 18.5 18.9 19.3 19.6 19.8 20.1 16.7 17.3 17.7 18.1 18.3 18.5 18.7 18.9 19.1 19.4 19.9 20.2 20.7 21.2 21.4 19.3 19.7 18.0 18.7 19.6 19.7

12,096 12,294 12,788 13,235 13,645 14,043 14,358 14,643 14,872 15,073 15,290 14,361 14,839 15,206 15,532 15,766 15,926 16,073 16,222 16,438 16,711 17,082 17,399 17,843 18,235 18,440 18,515 18,895 19,123 19,873 20,742 22,847

19.0 17.2 17.8 18.4 19.0 19.5 19.9 20.3 20.6 20.8 21.1 17.7 18.3 18.7 19.1 19.3 19.5 19.7 19.9 20.1 20.4 20.9 21.2 21.7 22.2 22.4 20.3 20.7 19.0 19.7 20.6 20.7

12,768 13,054 13,548 13,995 14,405 14,803 15,118 15,403 15,632 15,833 16,050 15,221 15,699 16,066 16,392 16,626 16,786 16,933 17,082 17,298 17,571 17,942 18,259 18,703 19,095 19,300 19,475 19,855 20,183 20,933 21,802 24,007

Data Sets / 73 Table 5052-3 Isostress calculations for 5052 and 5052 welded with 5052 filler alloy Alloy and temper

5052-O

Isostress, ksi

15.0 14.0 13.0 10.0 9.0 9.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 4.0

Temperature (T1)

Temperature (T2)

°F

°R

t1, h

log t1

300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

760 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860

168 380 741 29 85 85 62 124 190 117 440 720 1300 7000 100

2.225 2.580 2.870 0.845 1.079 1.079 1.792 2.093 2.279 2.068 2.643 2.857 3.114 3.845 2.000

T1 log t1

1691.0 1960.8 2181.2 726.7 927.9 927.9 1541.1 1800.0 1959.9 1778.5 2273.0 2457.0 2678.0 3306.7 1720.0

°F

°R

t2, h

log t2

400 400 400 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500

860 860 860 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960

0.82 2 4.2 0.63 0.45 1.1 2 2 2 3.45 0.7 8 8 22 5.5

0.086 0.301 0.632 –0.201 –0.347 0.041 0.301 0.301 0.301 0.538 0.538 0.903 0.903 1.342 0.740

T2 log t2

74.0 258.9 543.5 –193.0 –333.1 39.4 289.0 289.0 289.0 516.5 516.5 866.9 866.9 1288.3 710.4

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

1617.0 1701.9 1637.7 919.7 1261.1 888.6 1252.2 1511.0 1671.0 1262.0 1756.5 1590.1 1811.2 2018.4 1009.6

T2 – T1

CLMP

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

16.2 17.0 16.4 9.2 12.6 8.9 12.5 15.1 16.7 12.6 17.6 15.9 18.1 20.2 10.1

CLMP avg

15.6 5052-H32

26.0 25.0 15.0 12.0

212 212 300 300

672 672 760 760

284 819 270 1646

2.453 2.913 2.431 3.216

1648.4 1957.5 1847.6 2444.2

300 300 400 400

760 760 860 860

0.2 2 2.28 16

–0.691 0.346 0.358 1.204

–525.2 263.0 307.9 1035.4

2173.6 1694.6 1539.7 1408.7

88 88 100 100

24.7 19.3 15.4 14.1 18.4

5053-H38

30.0 30.0 20.0 20.0 15.0 15.0

212 212 300 300 300 300

672 672 760 760 760 760

143 143 50 82.5 346 543

2.155 2.155 1.700 1.916 2.539 2.734

1448.2 1448.2 1292.0 1456.2 1929.6 2077.8

300 300 400 400 400 400

760 760 860 860 860 860

0.52 1.88 0.56 0.56 3.9 4.2

–0.284 0.274 –0.252 –0.252 0.591 0.591

–215.8 208.2 –216.7 –216.7 508.3 508.3

1664.0 1239.9 1508.7 1672.9 1421.4 1569.6

88 88 100 100 100 100

18.9 14.1 15.1 16.7 14.2 15.7 15.8

5052-H112 18.0 AW 5052 17.0 16.0 15.0 5.0 4.0

300 300 300 300 400 500

760 760 760 760 860 960

185 370 680 1316 16,000 481

2.267 2.563 2.833 3.119 4.204 2.682

1722.9 1947.9 2153.1 2370.4 3615.4 2574.7

400 400 400 400 500 600

860 860 860 860 960 1060

0.5 1.8 4.8 11.5 193 11

–0.301 0.255 0.681 1.061 2.286 1.041

–258.9 219.3 585.7 912.5 2194.6 1103.5

1981.8 1728.6 1567.4 1458.0 1420.9 1471.3

100 100 100 100 100 100

19.8 17.3 15.7 14.6 14.2 14.7

16.0 Overall average = 16.1

Fig. 5052-1

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5052-O products. CLMP = 16.2

74 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5052-2

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5052-H32 products. CLMP = 19.3

Fig. 5052-3

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5052-H34 products. CLMP = 17.5

Data Sets / 75

Fig. 5052-4

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5052-H38 products. CLMP = 16.8

Fig. 5052-5

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of 5052-O, 5052-H32, 5052-H34, and 5052-H38 products. CLMP = 16.0

76 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5052-6

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5052 welds in 5052-H112 as-welded plate. CLMP = 14.0

Fig. 5052-7

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5052 welds in 5052-H112 as-welded plate. CLMP = 14.5

Data Sets / 77

Fig. 5052-8

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5052 welds in 5052-H112 as-welded plate. CLMP = 15.3

Fig. 5052-9

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of 5052 welds in 5052-H112 plate and of 5052 plate of various tempers. CLMP = 16

78 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

5083-H321 Table 5083-1 Stress rupture data for 5083-H321 as welded with 5183 filler alloy CLMP = 14.9

Test temperature o

F

o

Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

log t

150

610

212

672

250

710

300

760

350

810

400

860

42.0 41.0 40.0 39.0 38.0 37.0 36.0 35.0 38.0 37.0 36.0 35.0 34.0 33.0 32.0 31.0 30.0 29.0 28.0 35.0 34.0 33.0 32.0 31.0 30.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 32.0 31.0 30.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0

3.8 7 14.5 27 51 96 180 360 0.9 1.4 2.2 4.1 7.9 16 35 76 186.5 450 1118 0.45 0.75 1.4 3 6.5 17.5 48 145 360 673 0.275 0.5 1.15 3 8 22 42.5 71 110 160 220 301 0.25 0.5 1.1 2.2 4.5 8 13.5 20 28 38 52 69.5 95 135 201 0.192 0.45 0.78 1.25 1.85 2.8 4.1 5.9 8.2 12 17 25

0.580 0.845 1.161 1.431 1.708 1.982 2.255 2.556 –0.046 0.146 0.342 0.613 0.898 1.204 1.544 1.881 2.271 2.653 3.048 –0.347 –0.125 0.146 0.477 0.813 1.243 1.681 2.161 2.556 2.828 –0.561 –0.301 0.061 0.477 0.903 1.342 1.628 1.851 2.041 2.204 2.342 2.479 –0.602 –0.301 0.041 0.342 0.653 0.903 1.130 1.301 1.447 1.580 1.716 1.842 1.978 2.130 2.303 –0.717 –0.347 –0.108 0.097 0.267 0.447 0.613 0.771 0.914 1.079 1.230 1.398

R

C + log t

15.5 15.7 16.1 16.3 16.6 16.9 17.2 17.5 14.9 15.0 15.2 15.5 15.8 16.1 16.4 16.8 17.2 17.6 17.9 14.6 14.8 15.0 15.4 15.7 16.1 16.6 17.1 17.5 17.7 14.3 14.6 15.0 15.4 15.8 16.2 16.5 16.8 16.9 17.1 17.2 17.4 14.3 14.6 14.9 15.2 15.6 15.8 16.0 16.2 16.3 16.5 16.6 16.7 16.9 17.0 17.2 14.2 14.6 14.8 15.0 15.2 15.3 15.5 15.7 15.8 16.0 16.1 16.3 (continued)

CLMP = 16.6

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

9443 9604 9797 9962 10,131 10,298 10,465 10,648 9982 10,111 10,243 10,425 10,616 10,822 11,050 11,277 11,539 11,796 12,061 10,333 10,490 10,683 10,918 11,156 11,462 11,773 12,113 12,394 12,587 10,898 11,095 11,370 11,687 12,010 12,344 12,561 12,731 12,875 12,999 13,104 13,208 11,581 11,825 12,102 12,346 12,598 12,800 12,984 13,123 13,241 13,349 13,459 13,561 13,671 13,794 13,934 12,197 12,516 12,721 12,897 13,044 13,198 13,341 13,477 13,600 13,742 13,872 14,016

17.2 17.4 17.8 18.0 18.3 18.6 18.9 19.2 16.6 16.7 16.9 17.2 17.5 17.8 18.1 18.5 18.9 19.3 19.6 16.3 16.5 16.7 17.1 17.4 17.8 18.3 18.8 19.2 19.4 16.0 16.3 16.7 17.1 17.5 17.9 18.2 18.5 18.6 18.8 18.9 19.1 16.0 16.3 16.6 16.9 17.3 17.5 17.7 17.9 18.0 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.6 18.7 18.9 15.9 16.3 16.5 16.7 16.9 17.0 17.2 17.4 17.5 17.7 17.8 18.0

10,480 10,641 10,834 10,999 11,168 11,335 11,502 11,685 11,124 11,253 11,385 11,567 11,759 11,964 12,193 12,419 12,681 12,938 13,203 11,540 11,697 11,890 12,125 12,363 12,669 12,980 13,320 13,601 13,794 12,190 12,387 12,662 12,979 13,302 13,636 13,853 14,023 14,167 14,291 14,396 14,500 12,958 13,202 13,479 13,723 13,975 14,177 14,361 14,500 14,618 14,726 14,836 14,938 15,048 15,171 15,311 13,659 13,978 14,183 14,359 14,506 14,660 14,803 14,939 15,062 15,204 15,334 15,478

Data Sets / 79

Table 5083-1

(continued ) CLMP = 14.9

Test temperature o

F

o

R

Applied stress, ksi

14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0

Rupture life (t), h

36 54 81 130 215

CLMP = 16.6

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

1.556 1.732 1.908 2.114 2.332

16.5 16.6 16.8 17.0 17.2

14,152 14,304 14,455 14,632 14,820

18.2 18.3 18.5 18.7 18.9

15,614 15,766 15,917 16,094 16,282

80 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 5083-2 Isostress, ksi

38.0 37.0 36.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 34.0 33.0 32.0 31.0 30.0 29.0 28.0 32.0 31.0 30.0 29.0 28.0 29.0 28.0 32.0 31.0 30.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 26.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0

Isostress calculations for 5083-H321 as welded with 5183 filler alloy

Temperature (T1)

Temperature (T2)

°F

°R

t1, h

log t1

T1 log t1

°F

°R

t2, h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

150 150 150 150 150 212 212 212 212 212 212 212 212 212 212 212 212 212 212 212 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350

610 610 610 610 610 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810

51 96 180 360 360 4.1 7.9 16 35 76 186.5 450 1118 35 76 186.5 450 1118 450 1118 3 6.5 17.5 48 145 360 673 48 145 360 673 673 3 8 22 42.5 71 110 160 220 301 42.5 71 110 160 220 301 2.2 4.5 8 13.5 20 28 38 52 69.5 95 135 201

1.708 1.982 2.255 2.556 2.556 0.613 0.898 1.204 1.544 1.881 2.271 2.653 3.048 1.544 1.881 2.271 2.653 3.048 2.653 3.048 0.477 0.813 1.243 1.681 2.161 2.556 2.828 1.681 2.161 2.556 2.828 2.828 0.477 0.903 1.342 1.628 1.851 2.041 2.204 2.342 2.479 1.628 1.851 2.041 2.204 2.342 2.479 0.342 0.653 0.903 1.130 1.301 1.447 1.580 1.716 1.842 1.978 2.130 2.303

1041.9 1209.0 1375.6 1559.2 1559.2 411.9 603.5 809.1 1037.6 1264.0 1526.1 1782.8 2048.3 1037.6 1264.0 1526.1 1782.8 2048.3 1782.8 2048.3 338.7 577.2 882.5 1193.5 1534.3 1814.8 2007.9 1193.5 1534.3 1814.8 2007.9 2007.9 362.5 686.3 1019.9 1237.3 1406.8 1551.2 1675.0 1779.9 1884.0 1237.3 1406.8 1551.2 1675.0 1779.9 1884.0 277.0 528.9 731.4 915.3 1053.8 1172.1 1279.8 1390.0 1492.0 1602.2 1725.3 1865.4

212 212 212 212 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 300 300 300 300 300 350 350 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 350 350 350 350 400 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

672 672 672 672 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 760 760 760 760 760 810 810 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 810 810 810 810 860 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860

0.9 1.4 2.2 4.1 0.45 0.45 0.75 1.4 3 6.5 17.5 48 145 0.275 0.5 1.15 3 8 0.25 0.5 0.275 0.5 1.15 3 8 22 42.5 0.25 0.5 1.1 2.2 0.192 0.25 0.5 1.1 2.2 4.5 8 13.5 20 28 0.192 0.45 0.78 1.25 1.85 2.8 0.192 0.45 0.78 1.25 1.85 2.8 4.1 5.9 8.2 12 17 25

–0.046 0.146 0.342 0.613 –0.347 –0.347 –0.125 0.146 0.477 0.813 1.243 1.681 2.161 –0.561 –0.301 0.061 0.477 0.903 –0.602 –0.301 –0.561 –0.301 0.061 0.477 0.903 1.342 1.628 –0.602 –0.301 0.041 0.342 –0.717 –0.602 –0.301 0.041 0.342 0.653 0.903 1.130 1.301 1.447 –0.717 –0.347 –0.108 0.097 0.267 0.447 –0.717 –0.347 –0.108 0.097 0.267 0.447 0.613 0.771 0.914 1.079 1.230 1.398

–30.9 98.1 229.8 411.9 –246.4 –246.4 –88.8 103.7 338.7 577.2 882.5 1193.5 1534.3 –426.4 –228.8 46.4 362.5 686.3 –487.6 –243.8 –426.4 –228.8 46.4 362.5 686.3 1019.9 1237.3 –487.6 –243.8 33.2 277.0 –616.6 –487.6 –243.8 33.2 277.0 528.9 731.4 915.3 1053.8 1172.1 –616.6 –298.4 –92.9 83.4 229.6 384.4 –616.6 –298.4 –92.9 83.4 229.6 384.4 527.2 663.1 786.0 927.9 1057.8 1202.3

1072.8 1110.9 1145.7 1147.2 1805.5 658.3 692.2 705.4 698.9 686.8 643.6 589.3 513.9 1463.9 1492.8 1479.8 1420.3 1362.0 2270.4 2292.1 765.0 806.0 836.2 831.0 848.0 794.8 770.6 1681.1 1778.1 1781.6 1730.9 2624.5 850.1 930.1 986.7 960.3 877.8 819.7 759.7 726.1 712.0 1853.9 1705.2 1644.0 1591.6 1550.3 1499.6 893.6 827.4 824.3 831.9 824.2 787.7 752.6 726.9 706.0 674.2 667.5 663.2

T2 – T1

CLMP

CLMP avg

62 17.3 62 17.9 62 18.5 62 18.5 100 18.1 38 17.3 38 18.2 38 18.6 38 18.4 38 18.1 38 16.9 38 15.5 38 13.5 88 16.6 88 17.0 88 16.8 88 16.1 88 15.5 138 16.5 138 16.6 50 15.3 50 16.1 50 16.7 50 16.6 50 17.0 50 15.9 50 15.4 100 16.8 100 17.8 100 17.8 100 17.3 150 17.5 50 17.0 50 18.6 50 19.7 50 19.2 50 17.6 50 16.4 50 15.2 50 14.5 50 14.2 100 18.5 100 17.1 100 16.4 100 15.9 100 15.5 100 15.0 50 17.9 50 16.5 50 16.5 50 16.6 50 16.5 50 15.8 50 15.1 50 14.5 50 14.1 50 13.5 50 13.4 50 13.3 Overall average = 16.6

Data Sets / 81

Fig. 5083-1

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5083-H321 plate welded with 5183 filler alloy. CLMP = 14.9

Fig. 5083-2

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5083-H321 plate welded with 5183 filler alloy. CLMP = 16.6

82 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

5154-O Table 5154-1 Test temperature °F

°R

212

672

300

760

400

860

500

960

600

1060

Stress rupture data for 5154-O Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

log t

34.0 33.0 32.0 31.0 30.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0

0.04 0.26 0.7 1.4 2.9 5.4 10 18 35 67 130 240 430 790 0.046 0.15 0.35 0.73 1.4 2.7 4.9 9.1 19 37 70 140 270 550 0.046 0.13 0.3 0.58 1.1 2 3.8 7 12 21 40 74 150 270 530 1100 0.11 0.2 0.37 0.7 1.3 2 3.6 6.5 13 35 170 1.8 6 25 200

–1.398 –0.585 –0.155 0.146 0.462 0.732 1.000 1.255 1.544 1.826 2.114 2.380 2.633 2.898 –1.337 –0.824 –0.456 –0.137 0.146 0.431 0.690 0.959 1.279 1.568 1.845 2.146 2.431 2.740 –1.336 –0.886 –0.523 –0.237 0.041 0.301 0.580 0.845 1.079 1.322 1.602 1.869 2.176 2.431 2.724 3.041 –0.959 –0.698 –0.432 –0.155 0.114 0.301 0.556 0.813 1.114 1.544 2.230 0.255 0.778 1.398 2.301

CLMP = 14.5 C + log t T(C + log t)

13.1 13.9 14.3 14.6 15.0 15.2 15.5 15.8 16.0 16.3 16.6 16.9 17.1 17.4 13.2 13.7 14.0 14.4 14.6 14.9 15.2 15.5 15.8 16.1 16.3 16.6 16.9 17.2 13.2 13.6 14.0 14.3 14.5 14.8 15.1 15.3 15.6 15.8 16.1 16.4 16.7 16.9 17.2 17.5 13.5 13.8 14.1 14.3 14.6 14.8 15.1 15.3 15.6 16.0 16.7 14.8 15.3 15.9 16.8

8805 9351 9640 9842 10,054 10,236 10,416 10,587 10,782 10,971 11,165 11,343 11,513 11,691 10,004 10,394 10,673 10,916 11,131 11,348 11,544 11,749 11,992 12,212 12,422 12,651 12,868 13,102 11,321 11,708 12,020 12,266 12,505 12,729 12,969 13,197 13,398 13,607 13,848 14,077 14,341 14,561 14,813 15,085 12,999 13,250 13,505 13,771 14,029 14,209 14,454 14,700 14,989 15,402 16,061 15,640 16,195 16,852 17,809

CLMP = 15.5 C + log t T(C + log t)

14.1 14.9 15.3 15.6 16.0 16.2 16.5 16.8 17.0 17.3 17.6 17.9 18.1 18.4 14.2 14.7 15.0 15.4 15.6 15.9 16.2 16.5 16.8 17.1 17.3 17.6 17.9 18.2 14.2 14.6 15.0 15.3 15.5 15.8 16.1 16.3 16.6 16.8 17.1 17.4 17.7 17.9 18.2 18.5 14.5 14.8 15.1 15.3 15.6 15.8 16.1 16.3 16.6 17.0 17.7 15.8 16.3 16.9 17.8

9477 10,023 10,312 10,514 10,726 10,908 11,088 11,259 11,454 11,643 11,837 12,015 12,185 12,363 10,764 11,154 11,433 11,676 11,891 12,108 12,304 12,509 12,752 12,972 13,182 13,411 13,628 13,862 12,181 12,568 12,880 13,126 13,365 13,589 13,829 14,057 14,258 14,467 14,708 14,937 15,201 15,421 15,673 15,945 13,959 14,210 14,465 14,731 14,989 15,169 15,414 15,660 15,949 16,362 17,021 16,700 17,255 17,912 18,869

CLMP = 16.5 C + log t T(C + log t)

15.1 15.9 16.3 16.6 17.0 17.2 17.5 17.8 18.0 18.3 18.6 18.9 19.1 19.4 15.2 15.7 16.0 16.4 16.6 16.9 17.2 17.5 17.8 18.1 18.3 18.6 18.9 19.2 15.2 15.6 16.0 16.3 16.5 16.8 17.1 17.3 17.6 17.8 18.1 18.4 18.7 18.9 19.2 19.5 15.5 15.8 16.1 16.3 16.6 16.8 17.1 17.3 17.6 18.0 18.7 16.8 17.3 17.9 18.8

10,149 10,695 10,984 11,186 11,398 11,580 11,760 11,931 12,126 12,315 12,509 12,687 12,857 13,035 11,524 11,914 12,193 12,436 12,651 12,868 13,064 13,269 13,512 13,732 13,942 14,171 14,388 14,622 13,041 13,428 13,740 13,986 14,225 14,449 14,689 14,917 15,118 15,327 15,568 15,797 16,061 16,281 16,533 16,805 14,919 15,170 15,425 15,691 15,949 16,129 16,374 16,620 16,909 17,322 17,981 17,760 18,315 18,972 19,929

Data Sets / 83 Table 5154-2

Isostress calculations for 5154-O

Isostress, ksi

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

t1, h

log t1

T1 log t1

°F

°R

t2, h

log t2

27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0

212 212 212 212 212 212 212 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 500 500

672 672 672 672 672 672 672 760 760 760 760 760 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 960 960

18 35 67 130 240 430 790 9.1 19 37 70 140 270 550 7 12 21 40 74 150 270 530 1100 35 170

1.255 1.544 1.826 2.114 2.380 2.633 2.898 0.959 1.279 1.568 1.845 2.146 2.431 2.740 0.845 1.079 1.322 1.602 1.869 2.176 2.431 2.724 3.041 1.544 2.230

843.4 1037.6 1227.1 1420.6 1599.4 1769.4 1947.5 728.8 972.0 1191.7 1402.2 1631.0 1847.6 2082.4 726.7 927.9 1136.9 1377.7 1607.3 1871.4 2090.7 2342.6 2615.3 1482.2 2140.8

300 300 300 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 600 600

760 760 760 760 760 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 1060 1060

0.15 0.35 0.73 1.4 2.7 4.9 9.1 0.046 0.13 0.3 0.58 1.1 2 3.8 0.11 0.2 0.37 0.7 1.3 2 3.6 6.5 13 1.8 6

–0.824 –0.456 –0.137 0.146 0.431 0.690 0.959 –1.336 –0.886 –0.523 –0.237 0.041 0.301 0.580 –0.959 –0.698 –0.432 –0.155 0.114 0.301 0.556 0.813 1.114 0.255 0.778

Fig. 5154-1

Temperature (T2) T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

–626.2 –346.6 –104.1 111.0 327.6 524.4 728.8 –1149.0 –762.0 –449.8 –203.8 35.3 258.9 498.8 –920.6 –670.1 –414.7 –148.8 109.4 289.0 533.8 780.5 1069.4 270.3 824.7

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5154-O products. CLMP = 15.0

T2 – T1

CLMP

1469.6 88 16.7 1384.1 88 15.7 1331.2 88 15.1 1309.6 88 14.9 1271.8 88 14.5 1245.0 88 14.1 1218.6 88 13.8 1877.8 100 18.8 1734.0 100 17.3 1641.5 100 16.4 1606.0 100 16.1 1595.7 100 16.0 1588.7 100 15.9 1583.6 100 15.8 1647.3 100 16.5 1598.0 100 16.0 1551.6 100 15.5 1526.5 100 15.3 1497.9 100 15.0 1582.4 100 15.8 1556.9 100 15.6 1562.2 100 15.6 1545.8 100 15.5 1211.9 100 12.1 1316.1 100 13.2 Overall average = 15.5

84 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

5454-O, H32, H34 Table 5454-1

Archival isostress calculations for CLMP for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O plate

Isostress, ksi

Temperature (T1)

20.0 19.0 17.0 15.0 11.0 8.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 3.0

212 212 212 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 500 500 500

o

F

o

Temperature (T2)

R

t1, h

log t1

T1 log t1

672 672 672 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 860 960 960 960

1560 2700 11,010 275 3800 250 1094 2770 12,850 1094 12,850 35 239 1812

3.193 3.431 4.042 2.439 3.580 2.398 3.039 3.442 4.109 3.039 4.109 1.554 2.378 3.258

2145.7 2305.6 2716.2 1853.6 2720.8 2062.3 2613.5 2960.1 3533.7 2613.5 3533.7 1491.8 2282.9 3127.7

o

F

300 300 300 400 400 500 500 500 500 600 600 600 600 600

o

R

760 760 760 860 860 960 960 960 960 1060 1060 1060 1060 1060

t2,h

log t2

T2 log t2

15.5 25.7 81 2.8 32 7 35 89 239 1.1 8.5 1.1 8.5 35

1.190 1.410 1.908 0.447 1.505 0.845 1.554 1.949 2.378 0.041 0.829 0.041 0.929 1.554

904.4 1071.6 1450.1 384.4 1294.3 811.2 1491.8 1871.0 2282.9 43.5 878.7 43.5 984.7 1647.2

Table 5454-2 Archival calculations of activation energy for Dorn-Sherby parameter for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O plate Temperature combination, °F

212–300 300–400 300–350 400–500

400–600 500–600

Isostress, ksi

T1,°R

t1,h

20.0 19.0 17.0 15.0 11.0 8.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 3.0

672 672 672 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 860 960 960 960

1560 2700 11,010 275 3800 250 1094 2770 12,850 1094 12,850 35 239 1812

T2,°R

t2, h

Activation energy, ΔH

760 15.5 29,600 760 25.7 29,800 760 81 31,500 860 2.8 33,800 860 32 35,200 960 7 33,300 960 35 31,100 960 89 31,100 960 239 36,000 960 1.1 34,300 960 8.5 36,400 1060 1.1 38,200 1060 8.5 36,800 1060 35 43,600 Overall average = 34,336

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

CLMP

1241.3 88 14.1 1234.0 88 14.0 1266.1 88 14.4 1469.2 100 14.7 1426.5 100 14.3 1251.1 100 12.5 1121.7 100 11.2 1089.1 100 10.9 1250.9 100 12.5 2570.1 200 12.9 2655.0 200 13.3 1448.4 100 14.5 1298.1 100 13.0 1480.4 100 14.8 Overall average = 13.4

760

810

860

910

212

300

350

400

450

t, h

10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000

log t

4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000

17.954 18.954 17.954 18.954 17.954 18.954 17.954 18.954 17.954 18.954

C + log t

12,065 12,737 13,645 14,405 14,543 15,353 15,440 16,300 16,338 17,248

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 13.954

R&D rod; Fig. 5454-7

(a) This value is an extrapolation of the master curve. (b) Extrapolation is not justified.

°R

672

°F

Temperature (T)

Desired extrapolation

17.0 14.0 9.8 7.2 7.0 4.6 4.5 3.0 3.0 2.5(a)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

19.751 20.751 19.751 20.751 19.751 20.751 19.751 20.751 19.751 20.751

C + log t

13,273 13,945 15,011 15,771 15,998 16,808 16,986 17,846 17,973 18,883

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 15.751

19.5 16.0 11.5 9.0 8.1 5.6 5.2 3.7(a) 3.6 (b)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

3/4 in. plate; Lot 1; Fig. 5454-8

Table 5454-3 Effect of lot-to-lot variations on LMP extrapolated stresses

21.554 22.554 21.554 22.554 21.554 22.554 21.554 22.554 21.554 22.554

C + log t

14,484 15,156 16,381 17,141 17,459 18,269 18,536 19,396 19,614 20,524

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 17.554

19.0 16.0 11.8 8.2 7.1 4.0 (b) (b) (b) (b)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

3/4 in. plate; Lot 2; Fig. 5454-9

19.375 20.375 19.375 20.375 19.375 20.375 19.375 20.375 19.375 20.375

C + log t

13,020 13,692 14,725 15,485 15,694 16,504 16,663 17,523 17,631 18,541

18.6 15.5 11.0 8.0 7.3 5.0 4.8 3.6 3.6 2.8

Extrapolated stress, T(C + log t) ksi CLMP = 15.375

Composite; Fig. 5454-10

Data Sets / 85

86 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 5454-4 Temperature (T) °F

°R

200

660

212

672

250

710

300

760

350

810

375 400

835 860

450

910

Stress rupture strengths of 5454-O products at various temperatures with LMP calculations CLMP = 13.9

Stress, ksi

t, h

log t

C + log t

27.5 25 25 22.5 20 17 30 25 25 25 22.5 20 17 25 20 20 17 17 14 14 11 9 7.4 17 17 16 16 14 14 14 11 11 11 11 11 9 6.5 5.1 9 11 11 10.2 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 6 4.5 3.6 9

166 432 441 1516 10,069 31,940 + 15.5 223 22 21 98 461 1082 1.25 25 32.5 179 159 1021 955 4443 24,163 31,800 + 13 12.2 28.1 27 64 75 106 484 510 360 391 435 1580 10,674 36,000 + 476 53 47 95 158 188 170 198 132 150 164 711 1911 11,394 36,200 + 22.5

2.220 2.634 2.643 3.181 4.027 4.504 1.190 2.348 1.342 1.301 1.991 2.464 3.034 0.097 1.398 1.512 2.253 2.201 3.009 2.980 3.648 4.383 4.502 1.114 1.086 1.449 1.431 1.806 1.875 2.025 2.685 2.708 2.556 2.592 2.638 3.199 4.028 4.556 2.678 1.724 1.672 1.978 2.199 2.274 2.230 2.297 2.121 2.176 2.215 2.852 3.281 4.057 4.559 1.352

16.1 16.5 16.5 17.1 17.9 18.4 15.1 16.2 15.2 15.2 15.9 16.4 16.9 14.0 15.3 15.4 16.2 16.1 16.9 16.9 17.5 18.3 18.4 15.0 15.0 15.3 15.3 15.7 15.8 15.9 16.6 16.6 16.5 16.5 16.5 17.1 17.9 18.5 16.6 15.6 15.6 15.9 16.1 16.2 16.1 16.2 16.0 16.1 16.1 16.8 17.2 18.0 18.5 15.3

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 14.3 C + log t

10,639 16.5 10,912 16.9 10,918 16.9 11,273 17.5 11,832 18.3 12,147 18.8 10,140 15.5 10,919 16.6 10,822 15.6 10,793 15.6 11,283 16.3 11,618 16.8 12,023 17.3 10,638 14.4 11,626 15.7 11,713 15.8 12,276 16.6 12,237 16.5 12,851 17.3 12,829 17.3 13,336 17.9 13,895 18.7 13,986 18.8 12,161 15.4 12,139 15.4 12,433 15.7 12,418 15.7 12,722 16.1 12,778 16.2 12,899 16.3 13,434 17.0 13,452 17.0 13,329 16.9 13,359 16.9 13,396 16.9 13,850 17.5 14,522 18.3 14,949 18.9 13,843 17.0 13,437 16.0 13,392 16.0 13,655 16.3 13,845 16.5 13,910 16.6 13,872 16.5 13,929 16.6 13,778 16.4 13,825 16.5 13,859 16.5 14,407 17.2 14,776 17.6 15,443 18.4 15,875 18.9 13,879 15.7 (continued)

CLMP = 15.375

CLMP = 17.5

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

10,903 11,176 11,182 11,537 12,096 12,411 10,409 11,187 11,106 11,077 11,567 11,902 12,307 10,942 11,930 12,017 12,580 12,541 13,155 13,133 13,640 14,199 14,290 12,485 12,463 12,757 12,742 13,046 13,102 13,223 13,758 13,776 13,653 13,683 13,720 14,174 14,846 15,273 14,177 13,781 13,736 13,999 14,189 14,254 14,216 14,273 14,122 14,169 14,203 14,751 15,120 15,787 16,219 14,243

17.6 18.0 18.0 18.6 19.4 19.9 16.6 17.7 16.7 16.7 17.4 17.8 18.4 15.5 16.8 16.9 17.6 17.6 18.4 18.4 19.0 19.8 19.9 16.5 16.5 16.8 16.8 17.2 17.3 17.4 18.1 18.1 17.9 18.0 18.0 18.6 19.4 19.9 18.1 17.1 17.0 17.4 17.6 17.6 17.6 17.7 17.5 17.6 17.6 18.2 18.7 19.4 19.9 16.7

11,613 11,886 11,892 12,247 12,805 13,120 11,132 11,910 11,869 11,840 12,330 12,666 13,070 11,759 12,747 12,834 13,397 13,358 13,972 13,950 14,457 15,016 15,107 13,356 13,333 13,627 13,613 13,917 13,973 14,094 14,629 14,647 14,524 14,553 14,591 15,045 15,716 16,144 15,074 14,705 14,660 14,924 15,114 15,178 15,140 15,198 15,047 15,094 15,127 15,675 16,044 16,712 17,143 15,222

19.7 20.1 20.1 20.7 21.5 22.0 18.7 19.8 18.8 18.8 19.5 20.0 20.5 17.6 18.9 19.0 19.8 19.7 20.5 20.5 21.1 21.9 22.0 18.6 18.6 18.9 18.9 19.3 19.4 19.5 20.2 20.2 20.1 20.1 20.1 20.7 21.5 22.1 20.2 19.2 19.2 19.5 19.7 19.8 19.7 19.8 19.6 19.7 19.7 20.4 20.8 21.6 22.1 18.9

13,015 13,288 13,294 13,649 14,208 14,523 12,560 13,338 13,378 13,349 13,839 14,174 14,579 13,374 14,362 14,449 15,012 14,973 15,587 15,565 16,072 16,631 16,722 15,077 15,055 15,349 15,334 15,638 15,694 15,815 16,350 16,368 16,245 16,275 16,312 16,766 17,438 17,865 16,849 16,533 16,488 16,751 16,941 17,006 16,968 17,025 16,874 16,921 16,955 17,503 17,872 18,539 18,971 17,155

Data Sets / 87 Table 5454-4 Temperature (T ) °F

°R

(continued) Stress, ksi

9 7 7 7 7 4 7 7 5 5 5 4.5 4 4 3.75 3.5 3 2.35 4 4

500

960

550

1,010

600

1,060

5 4 4 3 3 2.5 2 2

700

1,160

2

CLMP = 13.9 t, h

CLMP = 14.3

CLMP = 15.375

CLMP = 17.5

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

37 101 87 91 107 3547 19.5 19 114 97 128 217 381 351 626 1155 3020 19,985 70 68

1.568 2.004 1.940 1.959 2.029 3.550 1.290 1.279 2.057 1.987 2.107 2.336 2.581 2.545 2.797 3.062 3.480 4.301 1.845 1.833

15.5 15.9 15.8 15.9 15.9 17.5 15.2 15.2 16.0 15.9 16.0 16.2 16.5 16.4 16.7 17.0 17.4 18.2 15.7 15.7

14,076 14,473 14,414 14,432 14,495 15,880 14,582 14,572 15,319 15,252 15,367 15,587 15,822 15,787 16,029 16,284 16,685 17,473 15,902 15,890

15.9 16.3 16.2 16.3 16.3 17.9 15.6 15.6 16.4 16.3 16.4 16.6 16.9 16.8 17.1 17.4 17.8 18.6 16.1 16.1

14,440 14,837 14,778 14,796 14,859 16,244 14,966 14,956 15,703 15,636 15,751 15,971 16,206 16,171 16,413 16,668 17,069 17,857 16,306 16,294

16.9 17.4 17.3 17.3 17.4 18.9 16.7 16.7 17.4 17.4 17.5 17.7 18.0 17.9 18.2 18.4 18.9 19.7 17.2 17.2

15,418 15,815 15,757 15,774 15,838 17,222 15,998 15,988 16,735 16,668 16,783 17,003 17,238 17,203 17,445 17,700 18,101 18,889 17,392 17,380

17,352 17,749 17,690 17,708 17,771 19,156 18,038 18,028 18,775 18,708 18,823 19,043 19,278 19,243 19,485 19,740 20,141 20,929 19,538 19,526

4.2 11.5 13 74 80 213 754 841

0.623 1.061 1.114 1.869 1.903 2.328 2.877 2.925

14.5 15.0 15.0 15.8 15.8 16.2 16.8 16.8 13.9 15.4

15,394 15,859 15,915 16,715 16,751 17,202 17,784 17,835

14.9 15.4 15.4 16.2 16.2 16.6 17.2 17.2

15,818 16,283 16,339 17,139 17,175 17,626 18,208 18,259

16.0 16.4 16.5 17.2 17.3 17.7 18.3 18.3

16,958 17,422 17,478 18,279 18,315 18,765 19,347 19,398

19.1 19.5 19.4 19.5 19.5 21.1 18.8 18.8 19.6 19.5 19.6 19.8 20.1 20.0 20.3 20.6 21.0 21.8 19.3 19.3 17.5 18.1 18.6 18.6 19.4 19.4 19.8 20.4 20.4

17,878

15.8

18,342

16.9

19,589

19.0

22,054

32.5

1.512

19,210 19,675 19,731 20,531 20,567 21,018 21,600 21,651

88 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 5454-5 Temperature (T ) °F

°R

200

660

212 250

672 710

275 300

735 760

350

810

400

860

450

910

500

960

550 600

1010 1060

Stress rupture strengths of 5454-H34 plate at various temperatures Stress, ksi

35 31 31 29 27 22 20 31 27 27 22 22 21 22 27 22 22 22 20 20 17 17 17 14 10 20 17 17 17 17 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 11 9 14 11 9 9 7 7 7 4 7 4 4 2.5

CLMP = 13.9 t, h

80 622 457 1332 2100 14,313 30,950 189 106 90 748 807 1185 185 6.6 46 56 39 101 101 347 367 364 1799 21,266 6.2 25 26 28 31 148 116 102 105 141 121 102 94 123 514 2092 12 68 218 177 1102 137 137 5374 30 463 117 188

CLMP = 14.3

CLMP = 15.375

CLMP = 17.5

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

1.903 2.794 2.660 3.124 3.322 4.156 4.491 2.276 2.025 1.954 2.874 2.907 3.074 2.267 0.820 1.663 1.748 1.591 2.004 2.004 2.540 2.565 2.561 3.255 4.328 0.792 1.398 1.415 1.447 1.491 2.170 2.064 2.009 2.021 2.149 2.083 2.009 1.973 2.090 2.710 3.320 1.079 1.833 2.338 2.248 3.042 2.137 2.137 3.730 1.477 2.666 2.068 2.274

15.8 16.7 16.6 17.0 17.2 18.1 18.4 16.2 15.9 15.9 16.8 16.8 17.0 16.2 14.7 15.6 15.6 15.5 15.9 15.9 16.4 16.5 16.5 17.2 18.2 14.7 15.3 15.3 15.3 15.4 16.1 16.0 15.9 15.9 16.0 16.0 15.9 15.9 16.0 16.6 17.2 15.0 15.7 16.2 16.1 16.9 16.0 16.0 17.6 15.4 16.6 16.0 16.2

10,430 11,018 10,930 11,236 11,367 11,917 12,138 10,870 11,307 11,256 11,910 11,933 12,052 11,883 11,187 11,828 11,892 11,773 12,087 12,087 12,494 12,513 12,510 13,038 13,853 11,901 12,391 12,405 12,431 12,467 13,017 12,931 12,886 12,896 13,000 12,946 12,886 12,857 12,952 13,454 13,948 12,882 13,530 13,965 13,887 14,570 14,594 14,594 16,043 14,762 15,903 16,128 17,144

16.2 17.1 17.0 17.4 17.6 18.5 18.8 16.6 16.3 16.3 17.2 17.2 17.4 16.6 15.1 16.0 16.0 15.9 16.3 16.3 16.8 16.9 16.9 17.6 18.6 15.1 15.7 15.7 15.7 15.8 16.5 16.4 16.3 16.3 16.4 16.4 16.3 16.3 16.4 17.0 17.6 15.4 16.1 16.6 16.5 17.3 16.4 16.4 18.0 15.8 17.0 16.4 16.6

10,694 11,282 11,194 11,500 11,631 12,181 12,402 11,139 11,591 11,540 12,194 12,217 12,336 12,177 11,491 12,132 12,196 12,077 12,391 12,391 12,798 12,817 12,814 13,342 14,157 12,225 12,715 12,729 12,755 12,791 13,341 13,255 13,210 13,220 13,324 13,270 13,210 13,181 13,276 13,778 14,272 13,226 13,874 14,309 14,231 14,914 14,958 14,958 16,407 15,146 16,287 16,532 17,568

17.3 18.2 18.0 18.5 18.7 19.5 19.9 17.7 17.4 17.3 18.2 18.3 18.4 17.6 16.2 17.0 17.1 17.0 17.4 17.4 17.9 17.9 17.9 18.6 19.7 16.2 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.9 17.5 17.4 17.4 17.4 17.5 17.5 17.4 17.3 17.5 18.1 18.7 16.5 17.2 17.7 17.6 18.4 17.5 17.5 19.1 16.9 18.0 17.4 17.6

11,403 11,992 11,903 12,209 12,340 12,890 13,112 11,861 12,354 12,304 12,957 12,980 13,099 12,967 12,308 12,949 13,013 12,894 13,208 13,208 13,615 13,634 13,631 14,159 14,974 13,095 13,586 13,600 13,626 13,661 14,211 14,126 14,081 14,091 14,194 14,141 14,081 14,052 14,147 14,649 15,143 14,150 14,799 15,233 15,156 15,839 15,936 15,936 17,386 16,178 17,319 17,617 18,708

19.4 20.3 20.2 20.6 20.8 21.7 22.0 19.8 19.5 19.5 20.4 20.4 20.6 19.8 18.3 19.2 19.2 19.1 19.5 19.5 20.0 20.1 20.1 20.8 21.8 18.3 18.9 18.9 18.9 19.0 19.7 19.6 19.5 19.5 19.6 19.6 19.5 19.5 19.6 20.2 20.8 18.6 19.3 19.8 19.7 20.5 19.6 19.6 21.2 19.0 20.2 19.6 19.8

12,806 13,394 13,306 13,612 13,743 14,293 14,514 13,289 13,863 13,812 14,466 14,489 14,608 14,529 13,923 14,564 14,628 14,509 14,823 14,823 15,230 15,249 15,246 15,774 16,589 14,817 15,307 15,321 15,347 15,383 15,933 15,847 15,802 15,812 15,916 15,862 15,802 15,773 15,868 16,370 16,864 15,978 16,626 17,061 16,983 17,666 17,870 17,870 19,319 18,218 19,359 19,764 20,960

Data Sets / 89 Table 5454-6 Comparison of actual long-time test results with extrapolated values for 5454-O plate based on short-life data (<10,000 h) Isostress calculations for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O plate from short-life data (<10,000 h) Isotress, ksi

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

t1, h

log t1

Temperature (T2)

25.0 25.0 20.0 17.0 17.0 14.0 11.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

200 250 250 250 300 300 300 350 350 400 400 450 450 500 500 500 500

660 710 710 710 760 760 760 810 810 860 860 910 910 960 960 960 960

436 21.5 461 1082 169 988 4443 436 1580 166 711 95 3547 366 112.5 366 3020

2.638 1.322 2.464 3.034 2.226 2.995 3.648 2.638 3.199 2.220 2.852 1.978 3.550 2.563 2.088 2.563 3.480

1741.1 938.6 1749.4 2154.1 1691.8 2276.2 2772.5 2136.8 2591.2 1909.2 2452.7 1800.0 3230.5 2460.5 2004.5 2460.5 3340.8

250 300 300 300 350 350 350 400 400 450 450 500 500 550 600 600 600

2.0

600

1060

798

2.902

3076.1

700

T1 log t1

°F

t2, h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

CLMP

710 760 760 760 810 810 810 860 860 910 910 960 960 1010 1060 1060 1060

21.5 1.25 28.8 169 12.6 81.6 436 50 166 30 95 19.2 366 69 4.2 12.2 77

1.322 0.097 1.450 2.226 1.100 1.902 2.638 1.699 2.220 1.477 1.978 1.284 2.563 1.839 0.623 1.086 1.886

938.6 73.7 1102.0 1691.8 891.0 1540.6 2136.8 1461.1 1909.2 1344.1 1800.0 1232.6 2460.5 1857.4 660.4 1151.2 1999.2

802.5 864.9 647.4 462.4 800.8 735.6 635.7 675.6 682.0 565.1 652.7 567.3 770.0 603.1 1344.1 1309.3 1341.6

50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 100 100 100

16.0 17.3 12.9 9.2 16.0 14.7 12.7 13.5 13.6 11.3 13.1 11.3 15.4 12.1 13.4 13.1 13.4

1160

32.5

1.512

1753.9

1322.2 100 13.2 Average 5454-O = 13.5

°R

Comparison of long-life stress rupture strengths with extrapolations Actual test results

CLMP = 13.5

Actual rupture Temperature (T1) Test stress, time, (t), °F °R ksi h

200

672

300

760

350

810

400

860

500

960

20.0 17.0 9.0 7.4 6.5 5.1 4.5 3.6 2.4

(a) Test was discontinued at this time.

10,069 31,940(a) 24,163 31,800(a) 10,674 36,000(a) 11,394 36,200(a) 19,985

log t

4.027 4.504 4.383 4.502 4.028 4.556 4.057 4.559 4.301

CLMP = 13.9; Fig. 5454-13

Extrapolated stress, C + log t T(C + log t) ksi

17.5 18.0 17.9 18.0 17.5 18.1 17.6 18.1 17.8

11,778 12,099 13,591 13,682 14,198 14,625 15,099 15,531 17,089

16.8 16.0(a) 8.5 7.5(a) 7.0 5.0(a) 4.7 3.8(a) 2.2

C + log t

T(C + log t)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

17.9 18.4 18.3 18.4 17.9 18.5 18.0 18.5 18.2

12,047 12,367 13,895 13,986 14,522 14,949 15,443 15,875 17,473

17.5 16.5(a) 8.5 5.0(a) 6.5 5.1(a) 4.5 3.5(a) 2.5

CLMP = 14.3; Fig. 5454-2

C + log t

T(C + log t)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

18.3 18.8 18.7 18.8 18.3 18.9 18.4 18.9 18.6

12,316 12,636 14,199 14,290 14,846 15,273 15,787 16,219 17,857

17.5 16.5(a) 9.0 8.0(a) 6.5 5.0(a) 4.5 3.5(a) 2.0

90 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 5454-7 Temperature (T) °F

°R

212

672

300

760

400

860

500

960

600

1060

700

1160

Stress rupture strengths of 5454-H32 plate welded with 5554 filler alloy at various temperatures CLMP = 13.9

CLMP = 14.3

CLMP = 15.375

CLMP = 17.5

Stress, ksi

t, h

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 2.5 2.0 1.1

9.5 18 35 63 120 1 2.2 4.7 9.9 22 45 90 180 340 685 2.6 4 6.4 11 20 40 80 175 400 4.5 11 42 197 1364 2 6.6 34 306 3.2 22 780

0.978 1.255 1.544 1.789 2.081 0.000 0.342 0.672 0.996 1.342 1.653 1.954 2.255 2.531 2.836 0.415 0.602 0.806 1.041 1.301 1.602 1.903 2.243 2.602 0.653 1.041 1.623 2.294 3.135 0.301 0.820 1.531 2.486 0.505 1.342 2.892

14.9 15.2 15.4 15.7 16.0 13.9 14.2 14.6 14.9 15.2 15.6 15.9 16.2 16.4 16.7 14.3 14.5 14.7 14.9 15.2 15.5 15.8 16.1 16.5 14.6 14.9 15.5 16.2 17.0 14.2 14.7 15.4 16.4 14.4 15.2 16.8

9998 10,184 10,378 10,543 10,739 10,564 10,824 11,075 11,321 11,584 11,820 12,049 12,278 12,488 12,719 12,311 12,472 12,647 12,849 13,073 13,332 13,591 13,883 14,192 13,971 14,343 14,902 15,546 16,354 15,053 15,603 16,357 17,369 16,710 17,681 19,479

15.3 15.6 15.8 16.1 16.4 14.3 14.6 15.0 15.3 15.6 16.0 16.3 16.6 16.8 17.1 14.7 14.9 15.1 15.3 15.6 15.9 16.2 16.5 16.9 15.0 15.3 15.9 16.6 17.4 14.6 15.1 15.8 16.8 14.8 15.6 17.2

10,267 10,453 10,647 10,812 11,008 10,868 11,128 11,379 11,625 11,888 12,124 12,353 12,582 12,792 13,023 12,655 12,816 12,991 13,193 13,417 13,676 13,935 14,227 14,536 14,355 14,727 15,286 15,930 16,738 15,477 16,027 16,781 17,793 17,174 18,145 19,943

16.4 16.6 16.9 17.2 17.5 15.4 15.7 16.0 16.4 16.7 17.0 17.3 17.6 17.9 18.2 15.8 16.0 16.2 16.4 16.7 17.0 17.3 17.6 18.0 16.0 16.4 17.0 17.7 18.5 15.7 16.2 16.9 17.9 15.9 16.7 18.3

10,989 11,175 11,370 11,534 11,730 11,685 11,945 12,196 12,442 12,705 12,941 13,170 13,399 13,609 13,840 13,579 13,740 13,916 14,118 14,341 14,600 14,859 15,151 15,460 15,387 15,759 16,318 16,962 17,770 16,617 17,167 17,920 18,933 18,421 19,392 21,190

18.5 18.8 19.0 19.3 19.6 17.5 17.8 18.2 18.5 18.8 19.2 19.5 19.8 20.0 20.3 17.9 18.1 18.3 18.5 18.8 19.1 19.4 19.7 20.1 18.2 18.5 19.1 19.8 20.6 17.8 18.3 19.0 20.0 18.0 18.8 20.4

T(C + log t)

12,417 12,603 12,798 12,962 13,158 13,300 13,560 13,811 14,057 14,320 14,556 14,785 15,014 15,224 15,455 15,407 15,568 15,743 15,945 16,169 16,428 16,687 16,979 17,288 17,427 17,799 18,358 19,002 19,810 18,869 19,419 20,173 21,185 20,886 21,857 23,655

Data Sets / 91 Table 5454-8 Product

Isostress, ksi

Isostress calculations for 5454 plate and 5554 welds in 5454 plate Temperature (T1) T1 log t1

°F

°R

t2, h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

CLMP

436 10,069 21.5 461 1082 169 988 4443 24,163 436 1580 166 711 95 3547 366 112.5 366 3020

2.638 4.027 1.322 2.464 3.034 2.226 2.995 3.648 4.383 2.638 3.199 2.220 2.852 1.978 3.550 2.563 2.088 2.563 3.480

1741.1 2657.8 938.6 1749.4 2154.1 1691.8 2276.2 2772.5 3331.1 2136.8 2591.2 1909.2 2452.7 1800.0 3230.5 2460.5 2004.5 2460.5 3340.8

250 250 300 300 300 350 350 350 350 400 400 450 450 500 500 550 600 600 600

710 710 760 760 760 810 810 810 810 860 860 910 910 960 960 1010 1060 1060 1060

21.5 461 1.25 28.8 169 12.6 81.6 436 1,580 50 166 30 95 19.2 366 69 4.2 12.2 77

1.322 2.464 0.097 1.450 2.226 1.100 1.902 2.638 3.199 1.699 2.220 1.477 1.978 1.284 2.563 1.839 0.623 1.086 1.886

938.6 1749.4 73.7 1102.0 1691.8 891.0 1540.6 2136.8 2591.2 1461.1 1909.2 1344.1 1800.0 1232.6 2460.5 1857.4 660.4 1151.2 1999.2

802.5 908.4 864.9 647.4 462.4 800.8 735.6 635.7 739.9 675.6 682.0 565.1 652.7 567.3 770.0 603.1 1344.1 1309.3 1341.6

50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 100 100 100

16.0 18.2 17.3 12.9 9.2 16.0 14.7 12.7 14.8 13.5 13.6 11.3 13.1 11.3 15.4 12.1 13.4 13.1 13.4

1060

798

2.902

3076.1

700

1160

32.5

1.512

1753.9

1322.2

100

13.2

200 200 250 250 300 300 300 350 350 350 400 400 450 450 500

660 660 710 710 760 760 760 810 810 810 860 860 910 910 960

2100 14,313 98 778 101 359 1799 117 514 2092 1102 1102 5374 5374 463

3.322 4.156 1.991 2.891 2.004 2.555 3.255 2.068 2.710 3.320 3.042 3.042 3.730 3.730 2.666

2192.5 2743.0 1413.6 2052.6 1523.0 1941.8 2473.8 1675.1 2195.1 2689.2 2616.1 2616.1 3394.3 3394.3 2559.4

250 250 300 300 350 350 350 400 400 400 450 500 500 550 550

710 710 760 760 810 810 810 860 860 860 910 960 960 1010 1010

98 778 6.6 58.5 6.2 27.5 117 12 47 202 137 30 463 117 117

1.991 2.891 0.820 1.767 0.792 1.439 2.068 1.079 1.672 2.305 2.137 1.477 2.666 2.068 2.068

1413.6 2052.6 623.2 1342.9 641.5 1165.6 1675.1 927.9 1437.9 1982.3 1944.7 1417.9 2559.4 2088.7 2088.7

778.9 690.3 790.4 709.7 881.5 776.2 798.7 747.1 757.2 706.9 671.5 1198.2 834.9 1305.6 470.7

50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 100 50 100 50

24.0

212

672

225

3.348

2249.9

300

760

1

0.000

0.0

2249.9

88

15.6 13.8 15.8 14.2 17.6 15.5 16.0 14.9 15.1 14.1 13.4 12.0 16.7 13.1 Avg 9.4 5454-H34 15.5 25.6

15.0 7.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

300 400 500 500 500

760 860 960 960 960

685 400 42 197 1364

2.836 2.602 1.623 2.294 3.135

2155.4 2237.7 1558.1 2202.2 3009.6

400 500 600 600 600

860 960 1060 1060 1060

2.6 4.5 2 6.6 34

0.415 0.653 0.301 0.820 1.531

356.9 626.9 319.1 869.2 1622.9

1798.5 1610.8 1239.0 1333.0 1386.7

100 100 100 100 100

2.0

600

1060

306

2.486

2635.2

700

1160

3.2

0.505

585.8

2049.4

100

°R

25.0 20.0 25.0 20.0 17.0 17.0 14.0 11.0 9.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

200 200 250 250 250 300 300 300 300 350 350 400 400 450 450 500 500 500 500

660 660 710 710 710 760 760 760 760 810 810 860 860 910 910 960 960 960 960

2.0

600

5454-H34

27.0 22.0 27.0 22.0 20.0 17.0 14.0 14.0 11.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

5454-H32 AW 5554

5454-O

Temperature (T2) log t1

°F

t1, h

CLMP avg

Avg 5454-O 13.8

18.0 16.1 12.4 13.3 13.9 Average 20.5 5554 weld 17.1 Average all = 14.9

92 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5454-1

Stress rupture strengths of 5454-O products at various temperatures. Stress versus rupture time

Data Sets / 93

Fig. 5454-2

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O products. CLMP = 14.3

94 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5454-3

Stress rupture strengths of 5454-O products at various temperatures. Stress versus rupture time. Following LMP analysis. Broken lines represent extrapolations using Larson-Miller Parameter

Fig. 5454-4

Time-temperature plot of stress rupture strengths for 5454-O products to determine Manson-Haferd constants. TA = –161 °F; log tA = 11.25

Data Sets / 95

Fig. 5454-5

Archival Manson-Haferd parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O products. TA = –161 °F; log tA = 11.25

96 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5454-6

Archival Dorn-Sherby parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O products. ΔH = 31,400

Data Sets / 97

Fig. 5454-7

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O rolled and drawn rod. CLMP = 13.954

Fig. 5454-8

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O plate, Lot 1. CLMP = 15.751

98 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5454-9

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O plate, Lot 2. CLMP = 17.554

Fig. 5454-10

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O products. CLMP = 15.375

Data Sets / 99

Fig. 5454-11

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for strength at minimum creep rate of 5454-O plate, Lot B. CLMP = 17.595

Fig. 5454-12

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for strength at minimum creep rate of 5454-O products, Lot B. CLMP = 15.735

100 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5454-13

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O plate with various values of CLMP

Fig. 5454-14

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-H32 products. CLMP = 15.5

Data Sets / 101

Fig. 5454-15

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-H32 products. CLMP = 17.06

Fig. 5454-16

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-H32 plate. CLMP = 16.3

102 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5454-17

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-H34 products. CLMP = 14.3

Data Sets / 103

Fig. 5454-18

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-H34 rolled and drawn rod. CLMP = 17.0

Fig. 5454-19

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-H32 plate as-welded with 5554 filler alloy. CLMP = 15.2

104 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5454-20

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O and H34 plate and 5554 welds in 5454-H32 plate. CLMP = 14.3

Fig. 5454-21

Semi-log Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5454-O plate from archival data, CLMP = 13.9

Data Sets / 105

5456-H321 Table 5456-1 Test temperature o

F

o

R

212

672

300

760

400

860

Stress rupture data for 5456-H321 as welded with 5556 filler alloy CLMP = 14.0 C + log t T(C + log t)

Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

log t

35.0 34.0 33.0 32.0 31.0 30.0 30.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0

12.3 21 35 63 110 187 1.52 3.5 7 13 20 34 50 73 110 160 230 321 1.84 2.8 3.8 5.3 7.3 10 14 20 29 43 63 98 160 258

1.090 1.322 1.544 1.799 2.041 2.272 0.182 0.544 0.845 1.114 1.301 1.531 1.699 1.863 2.041 2.204 2.362 2.507 0.265 0.447 0.580 0.724 0.863 1.000 1.146 1.301 1.462 1.633 1.799 1.991 2.204 2.412

15.1 15.3 15.5 15.8 16.0 16.3 14.2 14.5 14.8 15.1 15.3 15.5 15.7 15.9 16.0 16.2 16.4 16.5 14.3 14.4 14.6 14.7 14.9 15.0 15.1 15.3 15.5 15.6 15.8 16.0 16.2 16.4

10,140 10,296 10,446 10,617 10,780 10,935 10,778 11,053 11,282 11,487 11,629 11,804 11,931 12,056 12,191 12,315 12,435 12,545 12,268 12,424 12,539 12,663 12,782 12,900 13,026 13,159 13,297 13,444 13,587 13,752 13,935 14,114

CLMP = 14.6 C + log t T(C + log t)

15.7 15.9 16.1 16.4 16.6 16.9 14.8 15.1 15.4 15.7 15.9 16.1 16.3 16.5 16.6 16.8 17.0 17.1 14.9 15.0 15.2 15.3 15.5 15.6 15.7 15.9 16.1 16.2 16.4 16.6 16.8 17.0

10,544 10,700 10,849 11,020 11,183 11,338 11,234 11,509 11,738 11,943 12,085 12,260 12,387 12,512 12,647 12,771 12,891 13,001 12,784 12,940 13,055 13,179 13,298 13,416 13,542 13,675 13,813 13,960 14,103 14,268 14,451 14,630

CLMP = 15.0 C + log t T(C + log t)

16.1 16.3 16.5 16.8 17.0 17.3 15.2 15.5 15.8 16.1 16.3 16.5 16.7 16.9 17.0 17.2 17.4 17.5 15.3 15.4 15.6 15.7 15.9 16.0 16.1 16.3 16.5 16.6 16.8 17.0 17.2 17.4

10,812 10,968 11,118 11,289 11,452 11,607 11,538 11,813 12,042 12,247 12,389 12,564 12,691 12,816 12,951 13,075 13,195 13,305 13,128 13,284 13,399 13,523 13,642 13,760 13,886 14,019 14,157 14,304 14,447 14,612 14,795 14,974

Isostress calculations for 5456-H321 AW 5556 Isostress, ksi

30.0 21.0 20.0 19.0

Temperature (T1)

Temperature (T2)

°F

°R

t 1, h

log t1

T1 log t1

°F

°R

t2, h

log t2

212 300 300 300

672 760 760 760

187 160 230 321

2.272 2.204 2.362 2.507

1526.8 1675.0 1795.1 1905.3

300 400 400 400

760 860 860 860

1.52 1.84 2.8 3.8

0.182 0.265 0.447 0.580

T2 log t2

138.3 227.9 384.4 498.8

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

1388.5 1447.1 1410.7 1406.5

T2 – T1

CLMP

88 100 100 100

15.8 14.5 14.1 14.1

CLMP avg

Average 5456 AW 5556 14.6

106 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 5456-2 Stress, ksi

Application of Larson-Miller parameter to high-temperature tensile properties of 5456-H321 plate

Temperature (T) °F

°R

t, h

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t) LMP

LMP calculations for master curve — tensile strength of 5456-H321 48 212 672 1000 3.000 57.0 212 672 10,000 4.000 58.0 41 300 760 0.5 –0.301 53.7 300 760 10 1.000 55.0 40 300 760 100 2.000 56.0 38 300 760 1000 3.000 57.0 35 300 760 10,000 4.000 58.0 37 350 810 0.5 –0.301 53.7 36 350 810 10 1.000 55.0 35 350 810 100 2.000 56.0 33 350 810 1000 3.000 57.0 31 350 810 10,000 4.000 58.0 32 400 860 0.5 –0.301 53.7 31 400 860 10 1.000 55.0 30 400 860 100 2.000 56.0 28 400 860 1000 3.000 57.0 26 400 860 10,000 4.000 58.0 23 450 910 0.5 –0.301 53.7 22 450 910 10 1.000 55.0 450 910 100 2.000 56.0 21 450 910 1000 3.000 57.0 450 910 10,000 4.000 58.0 17 500 960 0.5 –0.301 53.7

Temperature (T)

Stress, ksi

°F

°R

t, h

log t

T(C + log t) LMP

C + log t

LMP calculations for master curve — Tensile yield strength of 5456-H321 37 212 672 0.5 –0.301 45.7 30,710 212 672 10 1.000 47.0 31,584 36 212 672 100 2.000 48.0 32,256 212 672 1000 3.000 49.0 32,928 35 212 672 10,000 4.000 50.0 33,600 33 300 760 0.5 –0.301 45.7 34,731 300 760 10 1.000 47.0 35,720 300 760 100 2.000 48.0 36,480 31 300 760 1000 3.000 49.0 37,240 28 300 760 10,000 4.000 50.0 38,000 350 810 0.5 –0.301 45.7 37,016 350 810 10 1.000 47.0 38,070 350 810 100 2.000 48.0 38,880 26 350 810 1000 3.000 49.0 39,690 24 350 810 10,000 4.000 50.0 40,500 22 400 860 0.5 –0.301 45.7 39,301 400 860 10 1.000 47.0 40,420 21 400 860 100 2.000 48.0 41,280 20 400 860 1000 3.000 49.0 42,140 19 400 860 10,000 4.000 50.0 43,000 15 450 910 0.5 –0.301 45.7 41,586 14 450 910 10 1.000 47.0 42,770 450 910 100 2.000 48.0 43,680 11 500 960 0.5 –0.301 45.7 43,871

38,304 38,976 40,811 41,800 42,560 43,320 44,080 43,496 44,550 45,360 46,170 46,980 46,181 47,300 48,160 49,020 49,880 48,866 50,050 50,960 51,870 52,780 51,551

Isostress calculation of CLMP for tensile and yield strengths of 5456-H321 at various temperatures Isostress, ksi

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

Temperature (T2) t1, h

log t1

T1 log t1

°F

2642.5 3040.0 3114.5 3240.0

CLMP calculations—Tensile yield strength of 5456-H321 28.0 300 760 10,000 4.000 3040.0 22.0 350 810 100,000 5.000 4050.0

CLMP calculations—Tensile strength of 5456-H321 37.0 300 760 2000 3.4770 35.0 300 760 10,000 4.0000 32.0 350 810 3170 3.8451 31.0 350 810 10,000 4.0000

°R

t2, h

350 350 400 400

810 810 860 860

0.5 10 0.5 10

350 400

810 860

100 10

log t2

T1 log t1

–0.3000 1.0000 –0.3000 1.0000 2.0 1.0

–243.0 810.0 –258.0 860.0

2885.5 2230.0 3372.5 2380.0

1620.0 860.0

1420.0 3190.0

T2 – T1

CLMP

50 50 50 50

57.7 44.6 67.5 47.6

50 28.4 50 63.8 Average value = 46.1

Source: W. Kauzmann, Flow of Solid Metals from the Standpoint of Chemical Rate Theory, Trans. AIME, Vol 143, 1941, p 57.

Table 5456-3 plate

Calculation of short-time high-temperature exposures simulating long-time service conditions for 5456-H116 LMP = T1(C + log t1)

T2 = LMP/(C + log t2)

Service exposure conditions

LMP short-time simulation temperatures

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

t1, h

log t1

C + log t1

T1 (C + log t1) target LMP

t2, h

log t2

(C + log t2)

LMP/ (C + log t2)

20

150

30

150

50

150

610 610 610 610 610 610

250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000

5.383 5.383 5.383 5.383 5.383 5.383

25.383 25.383 35.383 35.383 55.383 55.383

15,483.6 15,483.6 21,583.6 21,583.6 33,783.6 33,783.6

4 96 4 96 4 96

0.598 1.976 0.598 1.976 0.598 1.976

20.598 21.976 30.598 31.976 50.598 51.976

752 705 705 675 668 650

CLMP

Temperature (T2) °F

°R

752 705 705 675 668 650

292 245 245 215 208 190

Table 5456-4 Test temperature o

F

o

R

Comparison of stress rupture strengths for welds in 5052, 5083, and 5456 plate Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

Test temperature

CLMP = 15.0 log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

5052 as welded with 5052 filler alloy 212 672 26.0 10 300 760 24.0 0.15 23.0 0.67 22.0 2.6 21.0 9 20.0 30 19.0 78 18.0 185 17.0 370 16.0 680 15.0 1316 400 860 18.0 0.5 17.0 1.8 16.0 4.8 15.0 11.5 14.0 21.5 13.0 33 12.0 49 11.0 73 10.0 130 9.0 270 8.0 730 7.0 2145 6.0 5600 5.0 16,000 4.5 27,640 500 960 5.0 193 4.0 481 600 1060 4.0 11 3.0 56 2.0 370 700 1160 1.0 497

1.000 –0.824 –0.174 0.415 0.954 1.477 1.892 2.267 2.568 2.833 3.119 –0.301 0.255 0.681 1.061 1.332 1.519 1.690 1.863 2.114 2.431 2.863 3.231 3.748 4.204 4.442 2.286 2.682 1.041 1.748 2.568 2.696

16.0 14.2 14.8 15.4 16.0 16.5 16.9 17.3 17.6 17.8 18.1 14.7 15.3 15.7 16.1 16.3 16.5 16.7 16.9 17.1 17.4 17.9 18.2 18.7 19.2 19.4 17.3 17.7 16.0 16.7 17.6 17.7

10,752 10,774 11,268 11,715 12,125 12,523 12,838 13,123 13,352 13,553 13,770 12,641 13,119 13,486 13,812 14,046 14,206 14,353 14,502 14,718 14,991 15,362 15,679 16,123 16,515 16,720 16,595 16,975 17,003 17,753 18,622 20,527

5456 as welded with 5556 filler alloy 212 672 35.0 12.3 34.0 21 33.0 35 32.0 63 31.0 110 30.0 187 300 760 30.0 1.52 29.0 3.5 28.0 7 27.0 13 26.0 20 25.0 34 24.0 50 23.0 73 22.0 110 21.0 160 20.0 230 19.0 321 400 860 21.0 1.84 20.0 2.8 19.0 3.8 18.0 5.3 17.0 7.3 16.0 10 15.0 14 14.0 20 13.0 29 12.0 43 11.0 63 10.0 98 9.0 160 8.0 258

1.090 1.322 1.544 1.799 2.041 2.272 0.182 0.544 0.845 1.114 1.301 1.531 1.699 1.863 2.041 2.204 2.362 2.507 0.265 0.447 0.580 0.724 0.863 1.000 1.146 1.301 1.462 1.633 1.799 1.991 2.204 2.412

16.1 16.3 16.5 16.8 17.0 17.3 15.2 15.5 15.8 16.1 16.3 16.5 16.7 16.9 17.0 17.2 17.4 17.5 15.3 15.4 15.6 15.7 15.9 16.0 16.1 16.3 16.5 16.6 16.8 17.0 17.2 17.4

10,812 10,968 11,118 11,289 11,452 11,607 11,538 11,813 12,042 12,247 12,389 12,564 12,691 12,816 12,951 13,075 13,195 13,305 13,128 13,284 13,399 13,523 13,642 13,760 13,886 14,019 14,157 14,304 14,447 14,612 14,795 14,974

o

F

o

R

Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

5083 as welded with 5183 filler alloy 150 610 42.0 3.8 41.0 7 40.0 14.5 39.0 27 38.0 51 37.0 96 36.0 180 35.0 360 212 672 38.0 0.9 37.0 1.4 36.0 2.2 35.0 4.1 34.0 7.9 33.0 16 32.0 35 31.0 76 30.0 186.5 29.0 450 28.0 1,118 250 710 35.0 0.45 34.0 0.75 33.0 1.4 32.0 3 31.0 6.5 30.0 17.5 29.0 48 28.0 145 27.0 360 26.0 673 300 760 32.0 0.275 31.0 0.5 30.0 1.15 29.0 3 28.0 8 27.0 22 26.0 42.5 25.0 71 24.0 110 23.0 160 22.0 220 21.0 301 350 810 29.0 0.25 28.0 0.5 27.0 1.1 26.0 2.2 25.0 4.5 24.0 8 23.0 13.5 22.0 20 21.0 28 20.0 38 19.0 52 18.0 69.5 17.0 95 16.0 135 15.0 201 400 860 26.0 0.192 25.0 0.45 24.0 0.78 23.0 1.25 22.0 1.85 21.0 2.8 20.0 4.1 19.0 5.9 18.0 8.2 17.0 12 16.0 17 15.0 25 14.0 36 13.0 54 12.0 81 11.0 130 10.0 215

CLMP = 15.0 log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

0.580 0.845 1.161 1.431 1.708 1.982 2.255 2.556 –0.046 0.146 0.342 0.613 0.898 1.204 1.544 1.881 2.271 2.653 3.048 –0.347 –0.125 0.146 0.477 0.813 1.243 1.681 2.161 2.556 2.828 –0.561 –0.301 0.061 0.477 0.903 1.342 1.628 1.851 2.041 2.204 2.342 2.479 –0.602 –0.301 0.041 0.342 0.653 0.903 1.130 1.301 1.447 1.580 1.716 1.842 1.978 2.130 2.303 –0.717 –0.347 –0.108 0.097 0.267 0.447 0.613 0.771 0.914 1.079 1.230 1.398 1.556 1.732 1.908 2.114 2.332

15.6 15.8 16.2 16.4 16.7 17.0 17.3 17.6 15.0 15.1 15.3 15.6 15.9 16.2 16.5 16.9 17.3 17.7 18.0 14.7 14.9 15.1 15.5 15.8 16.2 16.7 17.2 17.6 17.8 14.4 14.7 15.1 15.5 15.9 16.3 16.6 16.9 17.0 17.2 17.3 17.5 14.4 14.7 15.0 15.3 15.7 15.9 16.1 16.3 16.4 16.6 16.7 16.8 17.0 17.1 17.3 14.3 14.7 14.9 15.1 15.3 15.4 15.6 15.8 15.9 16.1 16.2 16.4 16.6 16.7 16.9 17.1 17.3

9504 9665 9858 10,023 10,192 10,359 10,526 10,709 10,049 10,178 10,310 10,492 10,683 10,889 11,118 11,344 11,606 11,863 12,128 10,404 10,561 10,754 10,989 11,227 11,533 11,844 12,184 12,465 12,658 10,974 11,171 11,446 11,763 12,086 12,420 12,637 12,807 12,951 13,075 13,180 13,284 11,662 11,906 12,183 12,427 12,679 12,881 13,065 13,204 13,322 13,430 13,540 13,642 13,752 13,875 14,015 12,283 12,602 12,807 12,983 13,130 13,284 13,427 13,563 13,686 13,828 13,958 14,102 14,238 14,390 14,541 14,718 14,906

108 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5456-1

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5456-H321 plate as-welded with 5556 filler alloy. CLMP = 13

Fig. 5456-2

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 5456-H321 plate welded with 5556 filler alloy. CLMP = 14.6

Data Sets / 109

Fig. 5456-3

Tensile strengths of 5456-H321 plate at various temperatures

Fig. 5456-4

Tensile yield strengths of 5456-H321 plate at various temperatures

110 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 5456-5

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for tensile strengths of 5456-H321 plate. CLMP = 54

Fig. 5456-6

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for tensile yield strengths of 5456-H321 plate. CLMP = 46

Data Sets / 111

Fig. 5456-7

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of welds in 5052, 5083, and 5456 plate as welded (AW) with alloy indicated. CLMP = 15

112 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

6061-T6, T651 Table 6061-1

Stress rupture data for 1.25 in. thick 6061-T651 plate

Test temperature °F

°R

Testing source

Applied stress, ksi

200

660

212

672

250

710

275

735

300

760

C C C C C A A A A A A C A A C A C A C C C A A C B B A B B B B B B B B A B A B A A B B B B B B A A B B B B A A B A A B B A A B B B B

38 37.5 37 36.5 35.5 38 37 36 35 34.4 33.5 33 35 33 33 32 30 30 28 24 21 29 26 26 26 24 24 22.5 21 21 20 16.5 14 21 17 26 26 24 24 22 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 19 17 17 13 10 8.5 21 17 17 13 13 13 13 11 11 11 9 7 4

350

810

375

835

400

860

450

910

Rupture life, h

119 718 2522 4613 21,447 29 925 63 549 299 597 382 1.35 96 73 285 700 1017 1682 10,739 28,517 42 208 148 163 446 470 868 1912 1663 2814 14,705 27,325 397 2063 7 6.1 16 19 50 108 70 74 72 67 72 69 194 468 474 2445 29,125 34,800+ 4.8 27 22.4 177 257 121 182 681 941 632 4156 13,463 35,800

Test temperature °F

°R

500

960

550

1,010

600

1,060

650

1,110

700

1,160

750

1,210

Testing source

Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life, h

A A A A B A A B A B A A B B B B A A A B A A B A A A B B A A B A A A A B A B A A A A A A A A A A A

17 13 13 13 13 11 11 11 9.5 9.5 8 8 7 6 5 3 13 11 9.5 9 8 8 7 6 6 4 4 2.5 9.5 8 7 6 6 4 4 4 3 2 6 4 3 3 2.5 3 3 2.5 2.5 2 2

1.7 11 23 33 9.2 64 82 77 278 271 721 1078 1081 1838 2824 31,500 1 6 27 28.8 76 102 153 224 244 763 753 35,400+ 2.4 11 20 38 45 130 144 126 500 10,749+ 8.5 29 79 115 721 15 20 181 227 1086 332

Data Sets / 113 Table 6061-2 Isostress, ksi

Isostress calculations for 6061-T651 plate from Alcoa/MPC program

Temperature (T1)

Temperature (T2) log t1

T1 log t1

°F

°R

t2, h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

CLMP

1000

3.000

2280.0

350

810

27

1.431

1159.1

1120.9

50

22.4

810 810 860 860 860 910 910 910 910 910 960 960 960 960

205 465 80 470 470 27 200 800 200 800 19 185 900 900

2.312 2.667 1.903 2.672 2.672 1.431 2.301 2.903 2.301 2.903 1.279 2.267 2.954 2.954

1872.7 2160.3 1636.6 2297.9 2297.9 1302.2 2093.9 2641.7 2093.9 2641.7 1227.8 2176.3 2835.8 2835.8

400 400 450 450 500 500 500 500 550 550 550 550 550 600

860 860 910 910 960 960 960 960 1010 1010 1010 1010 1010 1060

7 20 4.8 27 1.7 1.7 19 71 1 5 1 17 85 11

0.845 1.301 0.681 1.431 0.231 0.231 1.279 1.851 0.000 0.699 0.000 1.231 1.929 1.041

726.7 1118.9 619.7 1302.2 221.8 221.8 1227.8 1777.0 0.0 706.0 0.0 1243.3 1948.3 1103.5

1146.0 1041.4 1016.9 995.7 2076.2 1080.5 866.1 864.8 2093.9 1935.7 1227.8 933.0 887.6 1732.4

50 50 50 50 100 50 50 50 100 100 50 50 50 100

1010 1010 1010 1010 1010 1060 1060 1060 1110 1110 1160

28 85 240 750 750 130 500 500 95 700 1100

1.447 1.929 2.380 2.875 2.875 2.114 2.699 2.699 1.978 2.845 3.041

1461.5 1948.3 2403.8 2903.8 2903.8 2240.8 2860.9 2860.9 2195.6 3158.0 3527.6

600 600 600 600 650 650 650 700 700 700 750

1060 1060 1060 1060 1110 1110 1110 1160 1160 1160 1210

2.4 11 41 130 30 30 95 20 20 200 350

0.380 1.041 1.613 2.114 1.477 1.477 1.978 1.301 1.301 2.301 2.544

402.8 1103.5 1709.8 2240.8 1639.5 1639.5 2195.6 1509.2 1509.2 2669.2 3078.2

1058.7 844.8 694.0 662.9 1264.3 601.4 665.4 1351.8 686.4 488.8 449.3

50 50 50 50 100 50 50 100 50 50 50

°F

°R

30.0

300

760

26.0 24.0 21.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 13.0 11.0 13.0 11.0 13.0 10.0 8.0 8.0

350 350 400 400 400 450 450 450 450 450 500 500 500 500

9.5 8.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.0

550 550 550 550 550 600 600 600 650 650 700

t1, h

CLMP avg

For 22.9 300–550 °F 20.8 20.3 20.3 19.9 20.8 21.6 17.3 17.3 20.9 19.4 24.6 18.7 17.8 17.3 For 600–750 °F 21.2 13.9 16.9 13.9 13.3 12.6 12.0 13.3 13.5 13.7 9.8 9.0 All 17.4

114 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 6061-3

Stress rupture data for composite 6061-T6 sheet and rolled and drawn rod

Temperature °F

°R

Applied stress, ksi

212

672

300

760

400

860

500

960

600

1,060

40.5 40 39 38 37 36.6 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 26 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 18.5 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5.5 10.5 10 9 8 7 6 5 4

Rupture life (t), h

0.06 0.375 4.6 49 490 1500 0.038 0.14 0.47 1.7 5.1 15.5 41 100 215 365 570 850 0.0475 0.135 0.32 0.76 1.65 3.1 6.1 11.5 19 32 50 77 120 180 290 440 730 1300 2200 4400 0.13 0.25 0.72 1.6 3.2 5 7.2 11.5 19.5 40 87 205 480 1050 1650 0.2 0.52 1.6 3.5 7.6 16 41 110

CLMP = 15 log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

–1.222 –0.426 0.663 1.690 2.690 3.176 –1.420 –0.854 –0.328 0.230 0.708 1.190 1.613 2.000 2.332 2.562 2.756 2.929 –1.323 –0.870 –0.495 –0.119 0.217 0.491 0.785 1.061 1.279 1.505 1.699 1.886 2.079 2.255 2.462 2.643 2.863 3.114 3.342 3.643 –0.886 –0.612 –0.143 0.204 0.505 0.699 0.857 1.061 1.290 1.602 1.940 2.312 2.681 3.021 3.217 –0.699 –0.284 0.204 0.544 0.881 1.204 1.613 2.041

13.8 14.6 15.7 16.7 17.7 18.2 13.6 14.1 14.7 15.2 15.7 16.2 16.6 17.0 17.3 17.6 17.8 17.9 13.7 14.1 14.5 14.9 15.2 15.5 15.8 16.1 16.3 16.5 16.7 16.9 17.1 17.3 17.5 17.6 17.9 18.1 18.3 18.6 14.1 14.4 14.9 15.2 15.5 15.7 15.9 16.1 16.3 16.6 16.9 17.3 17.7 18.0 18.2 14.3 14.7 15.2 15.5 15.9 16.2 16.6 17.0

9259 9794 10,526 11,216 11,888 12,214 10,321 10,751 11,151 11,575 11,938 12,304 12,626 12,920 13,172 13,347 13,495 13,626 11,762 12,152 12,474 12,798 13,087 13,322 13,575 13,812 14,000 14,194 14,361 14,522 14,688 14,839 15,017 15,173 15,362 15,578 15,774 16,033 13,549 13,812 14,263 14,596 14,885 15,071 15,223 15,419 15,638 15,938 16,262 16,620 16,974 17,300 17,488 15,159 15,599 16,116 16,477 16,834 17,176 17,610 18,063

CLMP = 20 C + log t T(C + log t)

18.8 19.6 20.7 21.7 22.7 23.2 18.6 19.1 19.7 20.2 20.7 21.2 21.6 22.0 22.3 22.6 22.8 22.9 18.7 19.1 19.5 19.9 20.2 20.5 20.8 21.1 21.3 21.5 21.7 21.9 22.1 22.3 22.5 22.6 22.9 23.1 23.3 23.6 19.1 19.4 19.9 20.2 20.5 20.7 20.9 21.1 21.3 21.6 21.9 22.3 22.7 23.0 23.2 19.3 19.7 20.2 20.5 20.9 21.2 21.6 22.0

12,619 13,154 13,886 14,576 15,248 15,574 14,121 14,551 14,951 15,375 15,738 16,104 16,426 16,720 16,972 17,147 17,295 17,426 16,062 16,452 16,774 17,098 17,387 17,622 17,875 18,112 18,300 18,494 18,661 18,822 18,988 19,139 19,317 19,473 19,662 19,878 20,074 20,333 18,349 18,612 19,063 19,396 19,685 19,871 20,023 20,219 20,438 20,738 21,062 21,420 21,774 22,100 22,288 20,459 20,899 21,416 21,777 22,134 22,476 22,910 23,363

CLMP = 23 C + log t T(C + log t)

21.8 22.6 23.7 24.7 25.7 26.2 21.6 22.1 22.7 23.2 23.7 24.2 24.6 25.0 25.3 25.6 25.8 25.9 21.7 22.1 22.5 22.9 23.2 23.5 23.8 24.1 24.3 24.5 24.7 24.9 25.1 25.3 25.5 25.6 25.9 26.1 26.3 26.6 22.1 22.4 22.9 23.2 23.5 23.7 23.9 24.1 24.3 24.6 24.9 25.3 25.7 26.0 26.2 22.3 22.7 23.2 23.5 23.9 24.2 24.6 25.0

14,635 15,170 15,902 16,592 17,264 17,590 16,401 16,831 17,231 17,655 18,018 18,384 18,706 19,000 19,252 19,427 19,575 19,706 18,642 19,032 19,354 19,678 19,967 20,202 20,455 20,692 20,880 21,074 21,241 21,402 21,568 21,719 21,897 22,053 22,242 22,458 22,654 22,913 21,229 21,492 21,943 22,276 22,565 22,751 22,903 23,099 23,318 23,618 23,942 24,300 24,654 24,980 25,168 23,639 24,079 24,596 24,957 25,314 25,656 26,090 26,543

Data Sets / 115 Table 6061-4 Isostress, ksi

Isostress calculations for 6061-T6 sheet and rolled and drawn rod

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

38.0 37.0

212 212

672 672

31.0 30.0 29.0 28.0 27.0

300 300 300 300 300

18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

CLMP

760 760

0.038 0.14

–1.420 –0.854

–1079.2 –649.0

2214.9 2456.7

88 88

25.2 27.9

400 400 400 400 400

860 860 860 860 860

0.0475 0.135 0.32 0.76 1.65

–1.323 –0.870 –0.495 –0.119 0.217

–1137.8 –748.2 –425.7 –102.3 186.6

2657.8 2520.5 2372.8 2196.9 2039.4

100 100 100 100 100

26.6 25.2 23.7 22.0 20.4

1939.3 2117.3 2273.0 2462.2 2678.0 2874.1 3133.0

500 500 500 500 500 500 500

960 960 960 960 960 960 960

0.25 0.72 1.6 3.2 5 7.2 11.5

–0.612 –0.143 0.204 0.505 0.699 0.857 1.061

–587.5 –137.3 195.8 484.8 671.0 822.7 1018.6

2526.8 2254.6 2077.1 1977.4 2007.0 2051.4 2114.4

100 100 100 100 100 100 100

25.3 22.5 20.8 19.8 20.1 20.5 21.1

1217.5 1474.4 1757.1 2037.6 2296.0

400 400 400 400 400

860 860 860 860 860

0.52 1.6 3.5 7.6 16

–0.284 0.204 0.544 0.881 1.204

–244.2 175.4 467.8 757.7 1035.4

1461.8 1299.0 1289.3 1279.9 1260.5

100 100 100 100 100

°R

49 490

1.690 2.690

1135.7 1807.7

300 300

760 760 760 760 760

100 215 365 570 850

2.000 2.332 2.562 2.756 2.929

1520.0 1772.3 1947.1 2094.6 2226.0

400 400 400 400 400 400 400

860 860 860 860 860 860 860

180 290 440 730 1300 2200 4400

2.255 2.462 2.643 2.863 3.114 3.342 3.643

300 300 300 300 300

760 760 760 760 760

40 87 205 480 1050

1.602 1.940 2.312 2.681 3.021

o

R

810

400

860

500

960

600

1,060

700

1,160

10.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 2.5

T2 log t2

°F

350

Isostress, ksi

log t2

T1 log t1

Test temperature F

t 2, h

log t1

Table 6061-5

o

Temperature (T2) t1, h

CLMP avg

Average 212/300 26.5

Average 300/400 23.6

Average 400/500 21.4

14.6 13.0 12.9 12.8 Average 12.6 500/600 Average = 13.2 Overall average = 20.4

Stress rupture data for 6061-O plate and isostress calculations CLMP = 13.9

Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life (t), h

log t

C + log t

12.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 8.0 8.0 6.5 6.0 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.0 2.5 2.0 1.5

0.2 81 1.3 1.5 11 42 210 230 5500 0.7 4.5 11 80 450 462 2.1 2.8 42 160 240 175 >680 5.2 218 >940

–0.699 1.908 0.114 0.176 1.041 1.623 2.322 2.362 3.740 –0.155 0.653 1.041 1.903 2.653 2.665 0.322 0.447 1.623 2.204 2.380 2.243 2.832 0.716 2.338 2.973

13.2 15.8 14.0 14.1 14.9 15.5 16.2 16.3 17.6 13.7 14.6 14.9 15.8 16.6 16.6 14.2 14.3 15.5 16.1 16.3 16.1 16.7 14.6 16.2 16.9

Temperature (T1)

CLMP = 17.4

T(C + log t)

C + log t

10,693 12,804 12,052 12,105 12,849 13,350 13,951 13,985 15,170 13,195 13,971 14,343 15,171 15,891 15,902 15,075 15,208 16,454 17,070 17,257 17,112 17,736 16,955 18,836 19,573

16.7 19.3 17.5 17.6 18.4 19.0 19.7 19.8 21.1 17.2 18.1 18.4 19.3 20.1 20.1 17.7 17.8 19.0 19.6 19.8 19.6 20.2 18.1 19.7 20.4

CLMP = 20.3

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

13,528 15,639 15,062 15,115 15,859 16,360 16,961 16,995 18,180 16,555 17,331 17,703 18,531 19,251 19,262 18,785 18,918 20,164 20,780 20,967 20,822 21,446 21,015 22,896 23,633

19.6 22.2 20.4 20.5 21.3 21.9 22.6 22.7 24.0 20.1 21.0 21.3 22.2 23.0 23.0 20.6 20.7 21.9 22.5 22.7 22.5 23.1 21.0 22.6 23.3

15,877 17,988 17,556 17,609 18,353 18,854 19,455 19,489 20,674 19,339 20,115 20,487 21,315 22,035 22,046 21,859 21,992 23,238 23,854 24,041 23,896 24,520 24,379 26,260 26,997

Temperature (T2)

°F

°R

t1, h

log t1

T1 log t1

°F

°R

t2, h

350 400 400 400 500 500 600

810 860 860 860 960 960 1060

81 230 5500 5500 462 462 175

1.908 2.362 3.740 3.740 2.665 2.665 2.243

1545.5 2031.3 3216.4 3216.4 2558.4 2558.4 2377.6

400 500 500 500 600 600 700

860 960 960 960 1060 1060 1160

1.4 0.7 11 80 2.1 2.8 5.2

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

0.146 –0.155 1.041 1.903 0.322 0.447 0.716

125.6 –148.8 999.4 1826.9 341.3 473.8 830.6

1419.9 2180.1 2217.0 1389.5 2217.1 2084.6 1547.0

T2 – T1

CLMP

50 28.4 100 21.8 100 22.2 100 13.9 100 22.2 100 20.8 100 15.5 Overall average = 20.7

116 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 6061-6

Comparison of actual long-time test results with extrapolated values for 6061-T651 Actual test results

Temperature o

F

o

R

200 300

672 760

350

810

400

860

450

910

500 550 600

960 1010 1060

CLMP = 13.9

Test stress, ksi

Actual rupture time (t), h

log t

C + log t

35.5 24.0 21.0 16.5 14.0 10.0 8.5 7.0 4.0 3.0 2.5 2.0

21,447 10,739 28,517 14,705 27,325 29,128 >34,800(a) 13,463 >35,800(a) 31,500 >35,400(a) >10,749(a)

4.332 4.031 4.455 4.167 4.436 4.464 4.542 4.129 4.554 4.498 4.549 4.031

18.2 17.9 18.4 18.1 18.3 18.4 18.4 18.0 18.5 18.4 18.4 17.9

CLMP = 17.4

Extrapolated T(C + log t) stress, ksi

12,252 13,628 13,950 14,634 14,852 15,793 15,860 16,406 16,793 17,662 18,633 19,007

34.7 21.0 19.5 14.0 13.0 8.6 <8.0 6.0 <4.6 3.0 <2.5 <2.3

CLMP = 20.3

C + log t

T(C + log t)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

21.7 21.4 21.9 21.6 21.8 21.9 21.9 21.5 22.0 21.9 21.9 21.4

14,604 16,288 16,610 17,469 17,687 18,803 18,870 19,591 19,978 21,022 22,168 22,717

34.3 25.0 22.0 15.0 14.3 9.7 <9.5 7.6 <6.5 4.0 <2.5 <2.5

C + log t

T(C + log t)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

24.6 24.3 24.8 24.5 24.7 24.8 24.8 24.4 24.9 24.8 24.8 24.3

16,553 18,492 18,814 19,818 20,036 21,297 21,364 22,230 22,617 23,806 25,097 25,791

35.0 24.0 23.0 17.0 16.0 11.0 <10.6 8.3 <7.3 4.0 <2.9 <2.5

(a) Test was discontinued at this time.

Table 6061-7 Test temperature °F

°R

300

760

350

810

400

860

450

910

500

960

550 600

1010 1060

Stress rupture data for 1.25 in. thick 6061-T651 plate illustrating laboratory variations Applied stress, ksi

First testing source

33 30 26 26 26 24 26 24 21 17 17 13 11 13 11 9.5 4 4

A A A A B A A B A B A A A A B A A A

Rupture life, h

Second testing source

96 1017 208 208 163 470 7 19 108 474 27 217 811 22 77 278 763 137

Rupture life, h

C C B C C B B A B(a) A B B(b) B B A(c) B B B

Difference from average

Average rupture life, h

73 700 163 148 148 446 6.1 16 71 468 22.4 152 632 9.2 73 271 753 126

84.5 858.5 185.5 178 155.5 458 6.55 17.5 89.5 471 24.7 184.5 721.5 15.6 75 274.5 758 131.5

ksi

%

23.0 27 317.0 37 45.0 24 60.0 34 15.0 10 24.0 5 0.9 14 3.0 17 37.0 41 6.0 1 4.6 19 65.0 35 179.0 25 12.8 82 4.0 5 7.0 3 10.0 1 11.0 8 Average difference: 22

(a) B was average of five tests, 67–74 h. (b) Both were average of two tests. (c) A was average of two tests.

Table 6061-8 Comparison of actual long-time stress rupture test results of 6061-T651 (>10,000 h) with extrapolated predictions Actual test results Temperature o

F

o

R

200 300 350

672 760 810

400

860

450

910

500 550 600

960 1010 1060

CLMP = 13.9

Test stress, ksi

Actual rupture time (t), h

log t

C + log t

35.5 21.0 16.5 14.0 10.0 8.5 7.0 4.0 3.0 2.5 2.0

21,447 28,517 14,705 27,325 29,128 >34,800(a) 13,463 >35,800(a) 31,500 >35,400(a) >10,749(a)

4.332 4.455 4.167 4.436 4.464 4.542 4.129 4.554 4.498 4.549 4.031

18.2 18.4 18.1 18.3 18.4 18.4 18.0 18.5 18.4 18.4 17.9

(a) Test was discontinued at this time.

CLMP = 17.4

Extrapolated T(C + log t) stress, ksi

12,252 13,950 14,634 14,852 15,793 15,860 16,406 16,793 17,662 18,633 19,007

34.7 19.5 14.0 13.0 8.6 <8.0 6.0 <4.6 3.0 <2.5 <2.3

CLMP = 20.3

C + log t

T(C + log t)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

21.7 21.9 21.6 21.8 21.9 21.9 21.5 22.0 21.9 21.9 21.4

14,604 16,610 17,469 17,687 18,803 19,591 19,591 19,978 21,022 22,168 22,717

34.3 22.0 15.0 14.3 9.7 <9.5 7.6 <6.5 4.0 <2.5 <2.5

C + log t

T(C + log t)

Extrapolated stress, ksi

24.6 24.8 24.5 24.7 24.8 24.8 24.4 24.9 24.8 24.8 24.3

16,553 18,814 19,818 20,036 21,297 21,364 22,230 22,617 23,806 25,097 25,791

35.0 23.0 17.0 16.0 11.0 <10.6 8.3 <7.3 4.0 <2.9 <2.5

Data Sets / 117 Table 6061-9 Temperature o

F

o

R

212

672

225

685

250

710

300

760

350

810

400

860

450

910

500

960

Stress rupture strengths of 6061-T651 plate welded with 4043 filler alloy Stress, ksi

29.9 29.8 29.7 29.7 29.5 29.6 29.5 29.4 29.3 28.8 28.7 28.6 28.5 28.0 27.0 27.5 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 21.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 23.5 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 20.0 19.5 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.5 11.0 10.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0

CLMP = 13.9 t, h

0.1 0.133 19 1122 6.5 0.001 0.21 0.35 0.017 0.3 83 97 183.5 357.5 776 0.03 11 31 69.5 155 328 542 0.25 2.9 8.5 18.5 40.5 91 200 430 740 920 1438+ 0.05 0.23 1.2 2.9 5.3 9.3 18 33 60 134 290 715 0.02 0.12 0.28 0.78 1.75 3.5 8 17 37 80 117 175 375 0.13 0.4 0.9 1.9 4.2 8.6 15 19.5 41 87 200 320

log t

–1.000 –0.876 1.279 3.050 0.813 –2.000 –0.678 –0.456 –1.760 –0.523 1.919 1.987 2.264 2.553 2.890 –1.523 1.041 1.491 1.842 2.190 2.516 2.734 –0.602 0.462 0.929 1.267 1.607 1.959 2.301 2.633 2.869 2.964 3.158 –1.301 –0.638 0.079 0.462 0.724 0.968 1.255 1.519 1.778 2.127 2.462 2.854 –1.699 –0.921 –0.553 –0.108 0.243 0.544 0.903 1.230 1.568 1.903 2.068 2.243 2.574 –0.886 –0.398 –0.046 0.279 0.623 0.934 1.176 1.290 1.613 1.940 2.301 2.505

C + log t

T(C + log t)

12.9 8669 13.0 8752 15.2 10,200 17.0 11,390 14.7 9887 11.9 8152 13.2 9057 13.4 9209 12.1 8316 13.4 9498 15.8 11,231 15.9 11,280 16.2 11,476 16.5 11,682 16.8 11,921 12.4 9407 14.9 11,355 15.4 11,697 15.7 11,964 16.1 12,228 16.4 12,476 16.6 12,642 13.3 10,771 14.4 11,633 14.8 12,011 15.2 12,285 15.5 12,561 15.9 12,846 16.2 13,123 16.5 13,392 16.8 13,583 16.9 13,660 17.1 13,817 12.6 10,835 13.3 11,405 14.0 12,022 14.4 12,351 14.6 12,577 14.9 12,786 15.2 13,033 15.4 13,260 15.7 13,483 16.0 13,783 16.4 14,071 16.8 14,408 12.2 11,103 13.0 11,811 13.3 12,146 13.8 12,551 14.1 12,870 14.4 13,144 14.8 13,471 15.1 13,768 15.5 14,076 15.8 14,381 16.0 14,531 16.1 14,690 16.5 14,991 13.0 12,493 13.5 12,962 13.9 13,300 14.2 13,612 14.5 13,942 14.8 14,241 15.1 14,473 15.2 14,582 15.5 14,892 15.8 15,206 16.2 15,553 16.4 15,749 (continued)

CLMP = 17.4

CLMP = 20.3

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

16.4 16.5 18.7 20.5 18.2 15.4 16.7 16.9 15.6 16.9 19.3 19.4 19.7 20.0 20.3 15.9 18.4 18.9 19.2 19.6 19.9 20.1 16.8 17.9 18.3 18.7 19.0 19.4 19.7 20.0 20.3 20.4 20.6 16.1 16.8 17.5 17.9 18.1 18.4 18.7 18.9 19.2 19.5 19.9 20.3 15.7 16.5 16.8 17.3 17.6 17.9 18.3 18.6 19.0 19.3 19.5 19.6 20.0 16.5 17.0 17.4 17.7 18.0 18.3 18.6 18.7 19.0 19.3 19.7 19.9

11,021 11,104 12,552 13,742 12,239 10,549 11,455 11,607 10,713 11,983 13,716 13,765 13,961 14,167 14,406 12,067 14,015 14,357 14,624 14,888 15,136 15,302 13,606 14,468 14,846 15,120 15,396 15,681 15,958 16,227 16,418 16,495 16,652 13,845 14,415 15,032 15,361 15,587 15,796 16,043 16,270 16,493 16,793 17,081 17,418 14,288 14,996 15,331 15,736 16,055 16,329 16,656 16,953 17,261 17,566 17,716 17,875 18,176 15,853 16,322 16,660 16,972 17,302 17,601 17,833 17,942 18,252 18,566 18,913 19,109

19.3 19.4 21.6 23.4 21.1 18.3 19.6 19.8 18.5 19.8 22.2 22.3 22.6 22.9 23.2 18.8 21.3 21.8 22.1 22.5 22.8 23.0 19.7 20.8 21.2 21.6 21.9 22.3 22.6 22.9 23.2 23.3 23.5 19.0 19.7 20.4 20.8 21.0 21.3 21.6 21.8 22.1 22.4 22.8 23.2 18.6 19.4 19.7 20.2 20.5 20.8 21.2 21.5 21.9 22.2 22.4 22.5 22.9 19.4 19.9 20.3 20.6 20.9 21.2 21.5 21.6 21.9 22.2 22.6 22.8

12,970 13,053 14,501 15,691 14,188 12,536 13,441 13,593 12,700 14,042 15,775 15,824 16,020 16,226 16,465 14,271 16,219 16,561 16,828 17,092 17,340 17,506 15,955 16,817 17,195 17,469 17,745 18,030 18,307 18,576 18,767 18,844 19,001 16,339 16,909 17,526 17,855 18,081 18,290 18,537 18,764 18,987 19,287 19,575 19,912 16,927 17,635 17,970 18,375 18,694 18,968 19,295 19,592 19,900 20,205 20,355 20,514 20,815 18,637 19,106 19,444 19,756 20,086 20,385 20,617 20,726 21,036 21,350 21,697 21,893

118 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 6061-9 Temperature o

F

o

R

600

1060

700

1160

750

1210

800

1260

(continued) CLMP = 13.9

CLMP = 17.4

CLMP = 20.3

Stress, ksi

t, h

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

6.0 5.0 4.4 4.0 8.5 8.5 8.0 7.5 7.0 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.8 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.3 2.3 2.0 1.5 1.8 1.6 1.5

400 900 1500 2460 0.21 0.41 0.36 0.68 1.1 1.25 2 3.5 9.5 14 25 94 177 350 2285 5355 0.03 0.05 0.1 0.7 1.1 1.5 3.5 4.2 13.5 25 36 70 615 65 72.5 5

2.602 2.954 3.176 3.391 –0.678 –0.387 –0.444 –0.168 0.041 0.097 0.301 0.544 0.978 1.146 1.398 1.973 2.248 2.544 3.359 3.729 –1.523 –1.301 –1.000 –0.155 0.041 0.176 0.544 0.623 1.130 1.398 1.556 1.845 2.789 1.813 1.860 0.699

16.5 16.9 17.1 17.3 13.2 13.5 13.5 13.7 13.9 14.0 14.2 14.4 14.9 15.0 15.3 15.9 16.1 16.4 17.3 17.6 12.4 12.6 12.9 13.7 13.9 14.1 14.4 14.5 15.0 15.3 15.5 15.7 16.7 15.7 15.8 14.6

15,842 16,180 16,393 16,599 14,015 14,324 14,263 14,556 14,777 14,837 15,053 15,311 15,771 15,949 16,216 16,825 17,117 17,431 18,295 18,687 14,357 14,615 14,964 15,944 16,172 16,328 16,755 16,847 17,435 17,746 17,929 18,264 19,359 19,013 19,070 18,395

20.0 20.4 20.6 20.8 16.7 17.0 17.0 17.2 17.4 17.5 17.7 17.9 18.4 18.5 18.8 19.4 19.6 19.9 20.8 21.1 15.9 16.1 16.4 17.2 17.4 17.6 17.9 18.0 18.5 18.8 19.0 19.2 20.2 19.2 19.3 18.1

19,202 19,540 19,753 19,959 17,725 18,034 17,973 18,266 18,487 18,547 18,763 19,021 19,481 19,659 19,926 20,535 20,827 21,141 22,005 22,397 18,417 18,675 19,024 20,004 20,232 20,388 20,815 20,907 21,495 21,806 21,989 22,324 23,419 23,248 23,305 22,805

22.9 23.3 23.5 23.7 19.6 19.9 19.9 20.1 20.3 20.4 20.6 20.8 21.3 21.4 21.7 22.3 22.5 22.8 23.7 24.0 18.8 19.0 19.3 20.1 20.3 20.5 20.8 20.9 21.4 21.7 21.9 22.1 23.1 22.1 22.2 21.0

21,986 22,324 22,537 22,743 20,799 21,108 21,047 21,340 21,561 21,621 21,837 22,095 22,555 22,733 23,000 23,609 23,901 24,215 25,079 25,471 21,781 22,039 22,388 23,368 23,596 23,752 24,179 24,271 24,859 25,170 25,353 25,688 26,783 26,757 26,814 26,459

°F

250 300 300 300 300 300 300 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 500 500 500 500 500 600 600 600 600 600 500 500 700

27.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 21.0 23.0 21.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.5 2.0 5.0 4.0 1.5

710 760 760 760 760 760 760 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 810 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 910 910 910 910 910 910 910 960 960 960 960 960 1060 1060 1060 1060 1060 960 960 1160

°R

Temperature (T1)

776 69.5 155 328 542 328 542 8.5 18.5 40.5 91 200 430 740 920 1438 9.3 18 33 60 134 290 715 60 134 290 715 3.5 8 17 37 80 175 375 87 200 360 900 2460 11.7 25 136 350 2285 900 2460 615

Time (t1), h

2.890 1.842 2.190 2.516 2.734 2.516 2.734 0.929 1.267 1.607 1.959 2.301 2.633 2.869 2.964 3.158 0.968 1.255 1.519 1.778 2.127 2.462 2.854 1.778 2.127 2.462 2.854 0.544 0.903 1.230 1.568 2.068 2.243 2.574 1.940 2.301 2.553 2.954 3.391 1.063 1.398 2.111 2.544 3.359 2.954 3.391 2.789

log t1

2051.9 1399.9 1664.4 1912.2 2077.8 1912.2 2077.8 752.5 1026.3 1301.7 1586.8 1863.8 2132.7 2323.9 2400.8 2558.0 832.5 1079.3 1306.3 1529.1 1829.2 2117.3 2454.4 1529.1 1829.2 2117.3 2454.4 495.0 821.7 1119.3 1426.9 1881.9 2041.1 2342.3 1862.4 2209.0 2450.9 2835.8 3255.4 1126.8 1481.9 2237.7 2696.6 3560.5 2835.8 3255.4 3235.2

T1 log t1

300 350 350 350 350 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 600 600 600 600 600 700 700 700 700 700 700 700 800

°F

760 810 810 810 810 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 860 910 910 910 910 910 910 910 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 1060 1060 1060 1060 1060 1160 1160 1160 1160 1160 1160 1160 1260

°R

Temperature (T2)

Isostress calculations for 4043 welds in 6061-T651 plate

Isostress, ksi

Table 6061-10

11 0.25 2.9 8.5 40.5 0.23 2.9 0.23 1.2 2.9 5.3 9.3 18 33 33 33 0.28 0.78 1.75 3.5 8 17 37 0.13 0.4 0.8 1.9 0.13 0.4 0.8 1.9 4.2 8.6 17.2 0.36 1.1 3.5 11.7 25 0.1 0.9 3.5 13.5 70 0.1 0.9 5

Time (t2), h

1.041 –0.602 0.462 0.929 1.607 –0.638 0.462 –0.638 0.079 0.462 0.724 0.968 1.255 1.519 1.519 1.519 –0.921 –0.553 –0.108 0.544 0.903 1.230 1.568 –0.886 –0.398 –0.046 0.279 –0.886 –0.398 –0.046 0.279 0.623 0.934 1.233 –0.444 0.041 0.544 1.063 1.398 –1.000 –0.091 0.544 1.130 1.845 –1.000 –0.091 0.699

log t2

791.2 –487.6 374.2 752.5 1301.7 –548.7 397.3 –548.7 67.9 397.3 622.6 832.5 1079.3 1306.3 1306.3 1306.3 –838.1 –503.2 –98.3 495.0 821.7 1119.3 1426.9 –850.6 –382.1 –44.2 267.8 –850.6 –382.1 –44.2 267.8 598.1 896.6 1183.7 –470.6 43.5 576.6 1126.8 1481.9 –1160.0 –105.6 631.0 1310.8 2140.2 –1160.0 –105.6 880.7

T2 log t2

1260.7 1887.5 1290.2 1159.7 776.2 2460.8 1680.5 1301.2 958.3 904.4 964.2 1031.3 1053.4 1017.6 1094.5 1251.6 1670.6 1582.5 1404.6 1034.0 1007.5 998.0 1027.6 2379.6 2211.3 2161.5 2186.6 1345.6 1203.8 1163.5 1159.0 1283.8 1144.5 1158.7 2333.0 2165.5 1874.2 1709.1 1773.5 2286.8 1587.4 1606.6 1385.8 1420.3 3995.8 3360.9 2354.5

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2) CLMP

50 25.2 50 37.8 50 25.8 50 23.2 50 15.5 100 24.6 100 16.8 50 26.0 50 19.2 50 18.1 50 19.3 50 20.6 50 21.1 50 20.4 50 21.9 50 25.0 50 33.4 50 31.7 50 28.1 50 20.7 50 20.1 50 20.0 50 20.6 100 23.8 100 22.1 100 21.6 100 21.9 50 26.9 50 24.1 50 23.3 50 23.2 50 25.7 50 22.9 50 23.2 100 23.3 100 21.7 100 18.7 100 17.1 100 17.7 100 22.9 100 15.9 100 16.1 100 13.9 100 14.2 200 20.0 200 16.8 100 23.5 Overall average = 22.0

T2 – T1

Data Sets / 119

R

760

860

960

1,060

300

400

500

600

o

F

o

Temperature

21.5 21.0 20.5 20.0 19.5 19.0 18.5 18.0 17.5 17.0 16.5 16.0 14.0 17.0 16.5 16.0 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 13.5 13.0 12.5 12.0 11.5 11.0 10.5 10.0 12.5 12.0 11.5 11.0 10.5 10.0 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0 7.5 7.0 6.6 8.0 7.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5

0.027 0.16 0.8 3.3 8.7 20 40 67.5 110 170 230 314 1615 0.033 0.13 0.34 0.8 1.8 3.3 5.25 7.6 12 18 27.8 47 80 150 310 0.012 0.023 0.044 0.082 0.18 0.4 0.95 2.3 6 16 48 150 339 0.013 0.023 0.044 0.081 0.16 0.34 0.82 2.2 6.6 22 90 450

–1.569 –0.796 –0.097 0.519 0.940 1.301 1.602 1.829 2.041 2.230 2.362 2.497 3.208 –1.481 –0.886 –0.469 –0.097 0.255 0.519 0.720 0.881 1.079 1.255 1.443 1.672 1.903 2.176 2.491 –1.921 –1.638 –1.357 –1.060 –0.745 –0.398 –0.022 0.362 0.778 1.204 1.681 2.176 2.530 –1.886 –1.638 –1.357 –1.092 –0.796 –0.469 –0.086 0.342 0.820 1.342 1.954 2.653

log t

12.3 13.1 13.8 14.4 14.8 15.2 15.5 15.7 15.9 16.1 16.3 16.4 17.1 12.4 13.0 13.4 13.8 14.2 14.4 14.6 14.8 15.0 15.2 15.3 15.6 15.8 16.1 16.4 12.0 12.3 12.5 12.8 13.2 13.5 13.9 14.3 14.7 15.1 15.6 16.1 16.4 12.0 12.3 12.5 12.8 13.1 13.4 13.8 14.2 14.7 15.2 15.9 16.6

C + log t

Lot B

9372 9959 10,490 10,958 11,278 11,553 11,782 11,954 12,115 12,259 12,359 12,462 13,002 10,680 11,192 11,551 11,871 12,173 12,400 12,573 12,712 12,882 13,033 13,195 13,392 13,591 13,825 14,096 11,500 11,772 12,041 12,326 12,629 12,962 13,323 13,692 14,091 14,500 14,958 15,433 15,773 12,735 12,998 13,296 13,576 13,890 14,237 14,643 15,097 15,603 16,157 16,805 17,546

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 13.9

15.8 16.6 17.3 17.9 18.3 18.7 19.0 19.2 19.4 19.6 19.8 19.9 20.6 15.9 16.5 16.9 17.3 17.7 17.9 18.1 18.3 18.5 18.7 18.8 19.1 19.3 19.6 19.9 15.5 15.8 16.0 16.3 16.7 17.0 17.4 17.8 18.2 18.6 19.1 19.6 19.9 15.5 15.8 16.0 16.3 16.6 16.9 17.3 17.7 18.2 18.7 19.4 20.1

C + log t

12,032 12,619 13,150 13,618 13,938 14,213 14,442 14,614 14,775 14,919 15,019 15,122 15,662 13,690 14,202 14,561 14,881 15,183 15,410 15,583 15,722 15,892 16,043 16,205 16,402 16,601 16,835 17,106 14,860 15,132 15,401 15,686 15,989 16,322 16,683 17,052 17,451 17,860 18,318 18,793 19,133 16,445 16,708 17,006 17,286 17,600 17,947 18,353 18,807 19,313 19,867 20,515 21,256

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 17.4

18.7 19.5 20.2 20.8 21.2 21.6 21.9 22.1 22.3 22.5 22.7 22.8 23.5 18.8 19.4 19.8 20.2 20.6 20.8 21.0 21.2 21.4 21.6 21.7 22.0 22.2 22.5 22.8 18.4 18.7 18.9 19.2 19.6 19.9 20.3 20.7 21.1 21.5 22.0 22.5 22.8 18.4 18.7 18.9 19.2 19.5 19.8 20.2 20.6 21.1 21.6 22.3 23.0

C + log t

14,236 14,823 15,354 15,822 16,142 16,417 16,646 16,818 16,979 17,123 17,223 17,326 17,866 16,184 16,696 17,055 17,375 17,677 17,904 18,077 18,216 18,386 18,537 18,699 18,896 19,095 19,329 19,600 17,644 17,916 18,185 18,470 18,773 19,106 19,467 19,836 20,235 20,644 21,102 21,577 21,917 19,519 19,782 20,080 20,360 20,674 21,021 21,427 21,881 22,387 22,941 23,589 24,330 (continued)

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 20.3

8.5 8.0 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.8

13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.4

20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 9.0

0.133 0.31 1.6 3 5.3 16 44 170 2285 5355

0.15 1.2 5.4 19 46 99 230 470 1100 1700

0.083 0.75 3.25 10.5 14,440

Stress, Time (t), ksi h

–0.876 –0.509 0.204 0.477 0.724 1.204 1.643 2.230 3.359 3.724

–0.824 0.079 0.732 1.279 1.663 1.996 2.362 2.672 3.041 3.230

–1.081 –0.125 0.512 1.021 4.160

log t

13.0 13.4 14.1 14.4 14.6 15.1 15.5 16.1 17.3 17.6

13.1 14.0 14.6 15.2 15.6 15.9 16.3 16.6 16.9 17.1

12.8 13.8 14.4 14.9 18.1

C + log t

Lot C

13,805 14,194 14,950 15,240 15,501 16,010 16,476 17,098 18,295 18,681

12,553 13,420 14,047 14,572 14,940 15,260 15,612 15,909 16,263 16,445

11,024 11,847 12,394 12,832 15,532

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 13.9

Supplemental stress rupture strengths of different lots of 6061-T651 plate welded with 4043 filler alloy

Stress, Time (t), ksi h

Table 6061-11

16.5 16.9 17.6 17.9 18.1 18.6 19.0 19.6 20.8 21.1

16.6 17.5 18.1 18.7 19.1 19.4 19.8 20.1 20.4 20.6

16.3 17.3 17.9 18.4 21.6

17,515 17,904 18,660 18,950 19,211 19,720 20,186 20,808 22,005 22,391

15,913 16,780 17,407 17,932 18,300 18,620 18,972 19,269 19,623 19,805

14,034 14,857 15,404 15,842 18,542

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 17.4 C + log t

19.4 19.8 20.5 20.8 21.0 21.5 21.9 22.5 23.7 24.0

19.5 20.4 21.0 21.6 22.0 22.3 22.7 23.0 23.3 23.5

19.2 20.2 20.8 21.3 24.5

20,589 20,978 21,734 22,024 22,285 22,794 23,260 23,882 25,079 25,465

18,697 19,564 20,191 20,716 21,084 21,404 21,756 22,053 22,407 22,589

16,528 17,351 17,898 18,336 21,036

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 20.3 C + log t

120 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

R

1160

1210

1260

700

750

800

o

F

o

Temperature

5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0

0.015 0.035 0.1 0.33 1.3 6.2 40

–1.824 –1.456 –1.000 –0.481 0.114 0.792 1.602

log t

(continued)

Stress, Time (t), ksi h

Table 6061-11

12.1 12.4 12.9 13.4 14.0 14.7 15.5

C + log t

Lot B

14,008 14,435 14,964 15,566 16,256 17,043 17,982

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 13.9

15.6 15.9 16.4 16.9 17.5 18.2 19.0

C + log t

18,068 18,495 19,024 19,626 20,316 21,103 22,042

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 17.4

18.5 18.8 19.3 19.8 20.4 21.1 21.9

C + log t

21,432 21,859 22,388 22,990 23,680 24,467 25,406

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 20.3

1.8 1.6 1.5

4.0 3.0 2.0 1.5

Stress, ksi

65 72.5 5

0.35 3 72 615

Time t, h

1.813 1.860 0.699

–0.456 0.477 1.857 2.789

log t

15.7 15.8 14.6

13.4 14.4 15.8 16.7

C + log t

Lot C

19,013 19,070 18,395

15,595 16,677 18,278 19,359

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 13.9

19.2 19.3 18.1

16.9 17.9 19.3 20.2

23,248 23,305 22,805

19,655 20,737 22,338 23,419

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 17.4 C + log t

22.1 22.2 21.0

19.8 20.8 22.2 23.1

26,757 26,814 26,459

23,019 24,101 25,702 26,783

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 20.3 C + log t

Data Sets / 121

760

810

860

910

212

300

350

400

450

t, h

10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000

log t

4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000

17.7 18.7 17.7 18.7 17.7 18.7 17.7 18.7 17.7 18.7

C + log t

11,894 12,566 13,452 14,212 14,337 15,147 15,222 16,082 16,107 17,017

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 13.7

°R

672

760

810

860

910

°F

212

300

350

400

450

Temperature (T)

10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000

t, h

Desired extrapolation

log t

4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000

CLMP = 21.7

20.5 18.0 14.0 11.2 10.5 8.0 7.8 6.0 4.9 2.7

19.4 20.4 19.4 20.4 19.4 20.4 19.4 20.4 19.4 20.4

C + log t

CLMP = 24.65

Extrapolated stress, ksi

13,037 13,709 14,744 15,504 15,714 16,524 16,684 17,544 17,654 18,564

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 15.4

CLMP = 25.3

21.0 19.0 15.0 12.5 11.7 8.4 8.5 5.5 5.2 3.0

Extrapolated stress, ksi

20.9 21.9 20.9 21.9 20.9 21.9 20.9 21.9 20.9 21.9

C + log t

CLMP = 27.0

14,045 14,717 15,884 16,644 16,929 17,739 17,974 18,834 19,019 19,929

T(C + log t)

CLMP = 16.9

19.5 18.5 15.7 13.2 12.2 9.2 8.6 5.8 5.2 3.8

Extrapolated stress, ksi

CLMP = 29.0

22.1 23.1 22.1 23.1 22.1 23.1 22.1 23.1 22.1 23.1

14,851 15,523 16,796 17,556 17,901 18,711 19,006 19,866 20,111 21,021

19.0 16.5 12.0 10.7 9.7 8.2 7.8 5.2 6.0 4.5

17,270 17,942 19,532 20,292 20,817 21,627 22,102 22,962 23,387 24,297

20.0 17.8 12.0 10.7 9.7 8.6 8.0 6.8 6.3 4.8

28.7 29.7 28.7 29.7 28.7 29.7 28.7 29.7 28.7 29.7

19,253 19,925 21,774 22,534 23,207 24,017 24,639 25,499 26,072 26,982

21.0 19.0 13.0 11.2 10.0 9.0 8.2 7.2 6.8 5.3

29.3 30.3 29.3 30.3 29.3 30.3 29.3 30.3 29.3 30.3

760 810 860 910

300 350 400 450

R

672

o

212

F

o

10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000 10,000 100,000

t, h

Desired extrapolation Temperature (T) log t

4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000 4.000 5.000

25.3 26.3 25.3 26.3 25.3 26.3 25.3 26.3 25.3 26.3

C + log t

17,002 17,674 19,228 19,988 20,493 21,303 21,758 22,618 23,023 23,933

T(C + log t)

21.5 19.5 12.5 11.0 10.2 9.2 8.2 7.3 6.5 5.2

28.0 24.2 18.5 15.5 13.8 10.8 9.0 6.8 6.2 5.0

Extrapolated stress, ksi

19,690 20,362 22,268 23,028 23,733 24,543 25,198 26,058 26,663 27,573

CLMP = 21.3

Extrapolated stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 AW 4043, Lot C

25.7 26.7 25.7 26.7 25.7 26.7 25.7 26.7 25.7 26.7

31.0 32.0 31.0 32.0 31.0 32.0 31.0 32.0 31.0 32.0

20,832 21,504 23,560 24,320 25,110 25,920 26,660 27,520 28,210 29,120

20.0 18.8 13.8 12.0 10.5 9.5 8.2 7.0 6.5 4.8

33.0 34.0 33.0 34.0 33.0 34.0 33.0 34.0 33.0 34.0

22,176 22,848 25,080 25,840 26,730 27,540 28,380 29,240 30,030 30,940

23.0 21.0 12.5 11.4 10.5 9.5 8.5 7.5 6.8 5.8

Extrapolated Extrapolated Extrapolated Extrapolated Extrapolated Extrapolated stress, stress, stress, stress, stress, stress, C + log t T(C + log t) ksi C + log t T(C + log t) ksi C + log t T(C + log t) ksi C + log t T(C + log t) ksi C + log t T(C + log t) ksi C + log t T(C + log t) ksi

CLMP = 18.1

Extrapolated stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 AW 4043, Lot B

°R

672

°F

Desired extrapolation Temperature

Table 6061-12 Effect of lot-to-lot variations in CLMP on extrapolated stress rupture strengths of welded 6061-T6 extrapolated stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 AW 4043, Lot A

122 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Data Sets / 123 Table 6061-13 after welding Test temperature °F

°R

212

672

300

760

350

810

400

860

500

960

600

1060

Stress rupture data for 6061-T651 plate welded with 4043 and heat treated and aged

CLMP = 13.9

CLMP = 17.4

CLMP = 20.3

Applied stress, ksi

Rupture life, (t), h

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

37.0 35.0 32.0 31.5 31.0 30.5 30.0 29.0 28.0 25.0 29.0 27.5 21.0 18.0 26.0 21.0 15.0 12.0 14.0 9.5 7.5 7.5 5.0 7.5 5.0 3.0

0.33 14 0.75 6.5 97 140 90 150 270 510 6 9.5 192 580 2.3 12 140 435 3 10 26 37 465 0.5 7 50

–0.481 1.146 –0.125 0.813 1.987 2.146 1.954 2.176 2.431 2.708 0.778 0.978 2.283 2.763 0.362 1.079 2.146 2.638 0.477 1.000 1.415 1.568 2.667 –0.311 0.845 1.699

13.4 15.0 13.8 14.7 15.9 16.0 15.9 16.1 16.3 16.6 14.7 14.9 16.2 16.7 14.3 15.0 16.0 16.5 14.4 14.9 15.3 15.5 16.6 13.6 14.7 15.6

9018 10,111 10,469 11,182 12,074 12,195 12,049 12,218 12,412 12,622 11,889 12,051 13,108 13,497 12,265 12,882 13,800 14,223 13,802 14,304 14,702 14,849 15,904 14,404 15,630 16,535

16.9 18.5 17.3 18.2 19.4 19.5 19.4 19.6 19.8 20.1 18.2 18.4 19.7 20.2 17.8 18.5 19.5 20.0 17.9 18.4 18.8 19.0 20.1 17.1 18.2 19.1

11,370 12,463 13,129 13,842 14,734 14,855 14,709 14,878 15,072 15,282 14,724 14,886 15,943 16,332 15,275 15,892 16,810 17,233 17,162 17,664 18,062 18,209 19,264 18,114 19,340 20,245

19.8 21.4 20.2 21.1 22.3 22.4 22.3 22.5 22.7 23.0 21.1 21.3 22.6 23.1 20.7 21.4 22.4 22.9 20.8 21.3 21.7 21.9 23.0 20.0 21.1 22.0

13,318 14,412 15,333 16,046 16,938 17,059 16,913 17,082 17,276 17,486 17,073 17,235 18,292 18,681 17,769 18,386 19,304 19,727 19,946 20,448 20,846 20,993 22,048 21,188 22,414 23,319

Isostress calculations for 6061-T651 plate welded with 4043 and heat treated and aged after welding Isostress, ksi

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

t1, h

log t1

T1 log t1

Temperature (T2) °F

°R

t2, h

log t2

T2 log t2

29.0 27.5 26.0 21.0 7.5 7.5 5.0

300 300 350 350 500 500 500

760 760 810 810 960 960 960

150 350 20 192 26 37 465

2.176 2.544 1.301 2.283 1.415 1.568 2.667

1653.8 1933.4 1053.8 1849.2 1358.4 1505.3 2560.3

350 350 400 400 600 600 600

810 810 860 860 1060 1060 1060

6 9.5 2.3 12 0.5 0.5 7

0.778 0.978 0.362 1.079 –0.311 –0.311 0.845

630.2 792.2 311.3 927.9 –329.7 –329.7 895.7

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

CLMP

1023.6 50 20.5 1141.3 50 22.8 742.5 50 14.8 921.3 50 18.4 1688.1 100 16.9 1834.9 100 18.3 1664.6 100 16.6 Overall average = 18.3

124 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 6061-14 Temperature (T) °F

°R

212

672

300

760

400

860

500

960

Stress rupture strengths of 6061-T651 plate as-welded with 5154 filler alloy Stress, ksi

34.5 34.0 31.0 30.0 29.0 28.0 27.0 26.0 25.0 24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0

CLMP = 13.9 Time (t), h

26.5 399 6.7 15 23.5 39 64 100 180 2 3.2 5 7.5 12 18 27 38 54 78 110 160 228 350 610 1243 0.05 0.14 0.35 0.9 2 4.5 8.6 17 33 60 140 396

log t

CLMP = 17.4

C + log t

T(C + log t)

15.3 16.5 14.7 15.1 15.3 15.5 15.7 15.9 16.2 14.2 14.4 14.6 14.8 15.0 15.2 15.3 15.5 15.6 15.8 15.9 16.1 16.3 16.4 16.7 17.0 12.6 13.0 13.4 13.9 14.2 14.6 14.8 15.1 15.4 15.7 16.0 16.5

10,297 11,089 11,192 11,458 11,606 11,773 11,937 12,084 12,278 12,213 12,388 12,555 12,707 12,882 13,033 13,185 13,313 13,444 13,581 13,709 13,849 13,982 14,142 14,349 14,615 12,095 12,524 12,906 13,300 13,633 13,971 14,241 14,525 14,802 15,051 15,404 15,838

1.423 2.601 0.826 1.176 1.371 1.591 1.806 2.000 2.255 0.301 0.505 0.699 0.875 1.079 1.255 1.431 1.580 1.732 1.892 2.041 2.204 2.358 2.544 2.785 3.094 –1.301 –0.854 –0.456 –0.046 0.301 0.653 0.934 1.230 1.519 1.778 2.146 2.598

C + log t

18.8 20.0 18.2 18.6 18.8 19.0 19.2 19.4 19.7 17.7 17.9 18.1 18.3 18.5 18.7 18.8 19.0 19.1 19.3 19.4 19.6 19.8 19.9 20.2 20.5 16.1 16.5 16.9 17.4 17.7 18.1 18.3 18.6 18.9 19.2 19.5 20.0

T(C + log t)

12,649 13,441 13,852 14,118 14,266 14,433 14,597 14,744 14,938 15,223 15,398 15,565 15,717 15,892 16,043 16,195 16,323 16,454 16,591 16,719 16,859 16,992 17,152 17,359 17,625 15,455 15,884 16,266 16,660 16,993 17,331 17,601 17,885 18,162 18,411 18,764 19,198

CLMP = 20.3 C + log t

T(C + log t)

21.7 22.9 21.1 21.5 21.7 21.9 22.1 22.3 22.6 20.6 20.8 21.0 21.2 21.4 21.6 21.7 21.9 22.0 22.2 22.3 22.5 22.7 22.8 23.1 23.4 19.0 19.4 19.8 20.3 20.6 21.0 21.2 21.5 21.8 22.1 22.4 22.9

14,598 15,389 16,056 16,322 16,470 16,637 16,801 16,948 17,142 17,717 17,892 18,059 18,211 18,386 18,537 18,689 18,817 18,948 19,085 19,213 19,353 19,486 19,646 19,853 20,119 18,239 18,668 19,050 19,444 19,777 20,115 20,385 20,669 20,946 21,195 21,548 21,982

Isostress calculations for 6061-T651 plate welded with 5154 filler alloy and heat treated and aged after welding Isostress, ksi

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

Time (t1), h

log t1

T1 log t1

Temperature (T2) °F

°R

31.0 25.0 24.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 10.0

212 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

672 760 760 860 860 860 860 860 860 860

1680 200 800 78 110 160 228 350 610 1243

3.225 2.301 2.903 1.892 2.041 2.204 2.358 2.544 2.785 3.094

2167.2 1748.8 2206.3 1627.1 1755.3 1895.4 2027.9 2187.8 2395.1 2660.8

300 400 400 500 500 500 500 500 500 500

760 860 860 960 960 960 960 960 960 960

Time (t2), h

8 1 2 0.05 0.14 0.35 0.9 2 4.5 8.6

log t2

T2 log t2

0.903 0.000 0.301 –1.301 –0.854 –0.456 –0.046 0.301 0.653 0.934

686.3 0.0 258.9 –1249.0 –819.8 –437.8 –44.2 289.0 626.9 896.6

(T2 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2–T1

CLMP

1480.9 88 16.8 1748.8 100 17.5 1947.4 100 19.5 2876.1 100 28.8 2575.1 100 25.8 2333.2 100 23.3 2072.0 100 20.7 1898.9 100 19.0 1768.2 100 17.7 1764.2 100 17.6 Overall average = 20.7

Data Sets / 125 Table 6061-15 Test temperature (T) °F

°R

5454-H34 plate 200 660

212 250

672 710

275 300

735 760

350

810

400

860

450

910

500

960

550 600

1010 1060

Comparison of stress rupture strengths of 5454-H34 and 6061-T651 plate Applied stress, ksi

35 31 31 29 27 22 20 31 27 27 22 22 21 22 27 22 22 22 20 20 17 17 17 14 10 20 17 17 17 17 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 11 9 14 11 9 9 7 7 7 4 7 4 4 2.5

Rupture life, (t), h

80 622 457 1332 2100 14,313 30,950 189 106 90 748 807 1185 185 6.6 46 56 39 101 101 347 367 364 1799 21,266 6.2 25 26 28 31 148 116 102 105 141 121 102 94 123 514 2092 12 68 218 177 1102 137 137 5374 30 463 117 188

CLMP = 16 log t

C + log t

1.903 2.794 2.660 3.124 3.322 4.156 4.491 2.276 2.025 1.954 2.874 2.907 3.074 2.267 0.820 1.663 1.748 1.591 2.004 2.004 2.540 2.565 2.561 3.255 4.328 0.792 1.398 1.415 1.447 1.491 2.170 2.064 2.009 2.021 2.149 2.083 2.009 1.973 2.090 2.710 3.320 1.079 1.833 2.338 2.248 3.042 2.137 2.137 3.730 1.477 2.666 2.068 2.274

17.9 18.8 18.7 19.1 19.3 20.2 20.5 18.3 18.0 18.0 18.9 18.9 19.1 18.3 16.8 17.7 17.7 17.6 18.0 18.0 18.5 18.6 18.6 19.3 20.3 16.8 17.4 17.4 17.4 17.5 18.2 18.1 18.0 18.0 18.1 18.1 18.0 18.0 18.1 18.7 19.3 17.1 17.8 18.3 18.2 19.0 18.1 18.1 19.7 17.5 18.7 18.1 18.3

T(C + log t) LMP

11,816 12,404 12,316 12,622 12,753 13,303 13,524 12,281 12,798 12,747 13,401 13,424 13,543 13,426 12,783 13,424 13,488 13,369 13,683 13,683 14,090 14,109 14,106 14,634 15,449 13,602 14,092 14,106 14,132 14,168 14,718 14,632 14,587 14,597 14,701 14,647 14,587 14,558 14,653 15,155 15,649 14,688 15,336 15,771 15,693 16,376 16,505 16,505 17,954 16,778 17,919 18,249 19,370

Test temperature (T) °F

°R

Applied stress, ksi

6061-T651 plate (Part 1) 200 660 38 37.5 37 36.5 35.5 212 672 38 37 250 710 36 35 275 735 34.4 33.5 33 300 760 35 33 33 32 30 30 28 24 21 350 810 29 26 26 26 24 24 22.5 21 21 20 16.5 14 375 835 21 17 400 860 26 26 24 24 22 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 19 17 17 13 10 8.5 (continued)

CLMP = 16

Rupture life, (t), h

log t

C + log t

119 718 2522 4613 21,447 29 925 63 549 299 597 382 1.35 96 73 285 700 1017 1682 10,739 28,517 42 208 148 163 446 470 868 1912 1663 2814 14,705 27,325 397 2063 7 6.1 16 19 50 108 70 74 72 67 72 69 194 468 474 2445 29,125 34,800+

2.076 2.856 3.404 3.666 4.340 1.462 2.966 1.799 2.740 2.476 2.776 2.582 0.130 1.982 1.863 2.455 2.845 3.007 3.223 4.031 4.455 1.623 2.318 2.170 2.212 2.649 2.672 2.939 3.281 3.221 3.450 4.167 4.436 2.599 3.314 0.845 0.778 1.204 1.279 1.699 2.033 1.845 1.869 1.857 1.826 1.857 1.839 2.288 2.670 2.676 3.388 4.464 4.532

18.1 18.9 19.4 19.7 20.3 17.5 19.0 17.8 18.7 18.5 18.8 18.6 16.1 18.0 17.9 18.5 18.8 19.0 19.2 20.0 20.5 17.6 18.3 18.2 18.2 18.6 18.7 18.9 19.3 19.2 19.5 20.2 20.4 18.6 19.3 16.8 16.8 17.2 17.3 17.7 18.0 17.8 17.9 17.9 17.8 17.9 17.8 18.3 18.7 18.7 19.4 20.5 20.5

T(C + log t) LMP

11,930 12,445 12,807 12,980 13,424 11,734 12,745 12,637 13,305 13,580 13,800 13,658 12,259 13,666 13,576 14,026 14,322 14,445 14,609 15,224 15,546 14,275 14,838 14,718 14,752 15,106 15,124 15,341 15,618 15,569 15,755 16,335 16,553 15,530 16,127 14,487 14,429 14,795 14,860 15,221 15,508 15,347 15,367 15,357 15,330 15,357 15,342 15,728 16,056 16,061 16,674 17,599 17,658

126 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table 6061-15 Test temperature (T) °F

°R

(continued) Applied stress, ksi

6061-T651 plate (Part 2) 450 910 21 17 17 13 13 13 13 11 11 11 9 7 4 500 960 17 13 13 13 13 11 11 11 9.5 9.5 8 8 7 6 5 3 550 1,010 13 11 9.5 9 8 8 7 6 6 4 4 2.5 600 1,060 9.5 8 7 6 6 4 4 4 3 2 650 1,110 6 4 3 3 2.5 700 1,160 3 3 2.5 2.5 2 750 1,210 2

Rupture life, (t), h

4.8 27 22.4 177 257 121 182 681 941 632 4156 13,463 35,800+ 1.7 11 23 33 9.2 64 82 77 278 271 721 1078 1081 1838 2824 31,500 1 6 27 28.8 76 102 153 224 244 763 753 35,400+ 2.4 11 20 38 45 130 144 126 500 10,749+ 8.5 29 79 115 721 15 20 181 227 1086 332

CLMP = 16 log t

C + log t

0.681 1.431 1.350 2.248 2.410 2.083 2.260 2.833 2.974 2.801 3.619 4.129 4.554 0.230 1.041 1.372 1.519 0.864 1.806 1.908 1.892 2.444 2.433 2.858 3.032 3.033 3.264 3.451 4.498 0.000 0.778 1.431 1.459 1.881 2.009 2.185 2.350 2.387 2.883 2.877 4.549 0.380 1.041 1.301 1.580 1.653 2.114 2.158 2.100 2.699 4.031 0.929 1.462 1.897 2.061 2.858 1.176 1.301 2.258 2.356 3.036 2.521

16.7 17.4 17.4 18.2 18.4 18.1 18.3 18.8 19.0 18.8 19.6 20.1 20.6 16.2 17.0 17.4 17.5 16.9 17.8 17.9 17.9 18.4 18.4 18.9 19.0 19.0 19.3 19.5 20.5 16.0 16.8 17.4 17.5 17.9 18.0 18.2 18.4 18.4 18.9 18.9 20.5 16.4 17.0 17.3 17.6 17.7 18.1 18.2 18.1 18.7 20.0 16.9 17.5 17.9 18.1 18.9 17.2 17.3 18.3 18.4 19.0 18.5

T(C + log t) LMP

15,180 15,862 15,789 16,606 16,753 16,456 16,617 17,138 17,266 17,109 17,853 18,317 18,704 15,581 16,359 16,677 16,818 16,189 17,094 17,192 17,176 17,706 17,696 18,104 18,271 18,272 18,493 18,673 19,678 16,160 16,946 17,605 17,634 18,060 18,189 18,367 18,534 18,571 19,072 19,066 20,754 17,363 18,063 18,339 18,635 18,712 19,201 19,247 19,186 19,821 21,233 18,791 19,383 19,866 20,048 20,932 19,924 20,069 21,179 21,293 22,082 22,410

Data Sets / 127 40 200 °F 212 °F 250 °F

35

275 °F 300 °F

Stress rupture strength, ksi

30

350 °F 25 400 °F 375 °F

20 450 °F

15

500 °F 550 °F

10

650 °F

5

600 °F

700 °F 750 °F 0 1

10

10

2

(Test discontinued) 3

10

104

105

Rupture time, h

Alcoa data

Fig. 6061-1

U of M data

Test temperature °F °R 200 660 212 672 250 710 275 735 300 760 350 810 375 835 400 860

Alcoa data

U of M data

Test temperature °F °R 450 910 500 960 550 1010 600 1060 650 1110 700 1160 750 1210

Stress rupture strengths of 6061-T651 plate at various temperatures. Long-transverse specimen

128 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 6061-2

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 products except extrusions. CLMP = 19.6

Fig. 6061-3

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T651 plate with varying CLMP values

Data Sets / 129

130 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 6061-4

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of 6061-O and 6061-T651 plate. CLMP = 20.3

Fig. 6061-5

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T651 plate and 6061-T6 sheet and rolled and drawn rod. CLMP = 20.3

Data Sets / 131

Fig. 6061-6

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 0.1% creep strengths of 6061-T651 rolled and drawn rod. CLMP = 25.0

Fig. 6061-7

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 0.1% creep strengths of 6061-T6511 extruded rod. CLMP = 17.0

132 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 6061-8

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 0.2% creep strengths of 6061-T6511 extruded rod. CLMP = 19.0

Fig. 6061-9

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 0.5% creep strengths of 6061-T651 rolled and drawn rod. CLMP = 16.8

Data Sets / 133

Fig. 6061-10

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 0.5% creep strengths of 6061-T6511 extruded rod. CLMP = 20.0

Fig. 6061-11

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 1% creep strengths of 6061-T6511 extruded rod. CLMP = 20.4

134 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 6061-12

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for strength at minimum creep rate of 6061-T6 products. CLMP = 23.48

Fig. 6061-13

Stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate as-welded with 4043 filler alloy (Lot B) at various temperatures

Fig. 6061-14

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate as-welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot A. CLMP = 18.1

Data Sets / 135

Fig. 6061-15

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate as-welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot A. CLMP = 21.7

Fig. 6061-16

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot A. CLMP = 24.647

Fig. 6061-17

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate as-welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot A. CLMP = 25.3

136 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 6061-18

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot A. CLMP = 27.0

Fig. 6061-19

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate as-welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot A. CLMP = 29.0

Fig. 6061-20

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate as-welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot B. CLMP = 13.7

Data Sets / 137

Fig. 6061-21

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate as-welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot B. CLMP = 15.4

Fig. 6061-22

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate as-welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot B. CLMP = 16.9

Fig. 6061-23

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate as-welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot C. CLMP = 21.3

138 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 6061-24

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate welded with 4043 filler alloy, composite. CLMP = 20.3

Fig. 6061-25

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for strengths at minimum creep rate of 6061-T6 plate welded with 4043 filler alloy, Lot A. CLMP = 26.846

Data Sets / 139

Fig. 6061-26

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 6061-T6 plate welded with 5356 filler alloy. CLMP = 14.8

Fig. 6061-27

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of parent metal and 4043 welds as-welded in 6061-T651 plate. AW, tested as-welded. CLMP = 17.4

140 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 6061-28

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of parent metal and 4043 welds as-welded and heat treated and aged after welding in 6061-T651 plate. W, weld; AW, tested as-welded; HTAW, tested after heat treatment and aging after welding.

CLMP = 17.4

Fig. 6061-29

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of parent metal 6061-T651 plate and of 4043 and 5356 welds as-welded (AW) in 6061-T651 plate. CLMP = 20.3

Data Sets / 141

Fig. 6061-30

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of 5454-H34 and 6061-T651 plate. CLMP = 16

142 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

6063-T5, T6 Table 6063-1

Stress rupture data for 6063-T6 and isostress calculations

Test temperature

Alloy and temper

o

F

6063-T5

212 212 212 212 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 212 212 212 300 300 300 400 400 400

6063-T6

R

Applied stress, ksi

672 672 672 672 760 760 760 760 860 860 860 672 672 672 760 760 760 860 860 860

24.0 23.5 22.5 21.0 20.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 12.0 8.5 32.0 31.0 28.0 24.0 22.0 20.0 15.0 12.0 8.5

o

Rupture life, (t), h

19 9.7 463 1255 2.94 172 131.5 1040 5.2 50 504 7.8 19.1 894 25 195.5 442 16.3 97.3 570

CLMP = 19.0

CLMP = 20.0

CLMP = 21.0

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

1.278 0.987 2.666 3.100 0.467 2.236 2.119 3.158 0.716 1.699 2.702 0.892 1.281 2.951 1.398 2.291 2.645 1.204 1.988 2.756

20.3 20.0 21.7 22.1 19.5 21.2 21.1 22.2 19.7 20.7 21.7 19.9 20.3 22.0 20.4 21.3 21.6 20.2 21.0 21.8

13,627 13,431 14,560 14,851 14,795 16,139 16,050 16,840 16,956 17,801 18,664 13,367 13,629 14,751 15,502 16,181 16,450 17,375 18,050 18,710

21.3 21.0 22.7 23.1 20.5 22.2 22.1 23.2 20.7 21.7 22.7 20.9 21.3 23.0 21.4 22.3 22.6 21.2 22.0 22.8

14,299 14,103 15,232 15,523 15,555 16,899 16,810 17,600 17,816 18,661 19,524 14,039 14,301 15,423 16,262 16,941 17,210 18,235 18,910 19,570

22.3 22.0 23.7 24.1 21.5 23.2 23.1 24.2 21.7 22.7 23.7 21.9 22.3 24.0 22.4 23.3 23.6 22.2 23.0 23.8

T(C + log t)

14,971 14,775 15,904 16,195 16,315 17,659 17,570 18,360 18,676 19,521 20,384 14,711 14,973 16,095 17,022 17,701 17,970 19,095 19,770 20,430

Isostress calculations for 6063-T6 Alloy and temper

Isostress, ksi

Temperature (T1) °F

°R

Temperature (T2) Time (t1), h

log t1

T1 log t1

°F

°R

Time (t2), h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

88 88 100

6063-T5

20.0 18.0 15.0

212 212 300

672 672 760

2200 20,000 3000

3.342 4.301 3.477

2245.8 2890.3 2642.5

300 300 400

760 760 860

2.94 15 5.2

0.467 1.278 0.716

354.9 971.3 615.8

1890.9 1919.0 2026.8

6063-T6

25.0 16.0 15.0

212 300 300

672 760 760

10,000 1000 6200

4.000 3.000 3.792

2688.0 2280.0 2881.9

300 400 400

760 860 860

10 4 16.3

1.000 0.602 1.212

760.0 517.7 1042.3

1928.0 1762.3 1839.6

Fig. 6063-1

CLMP

CLMP avg

21.5 (Estimated) 21.8 (Estimated) 20.3 (Estimated) Average = 21.2 88 21.9 (Estimated) 100 17.6 (Estimated) 100 18.4 (Estimated) Average = 19.3 Overall average = 20.2

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for strength at minimum creep rate of 6063-T5 extruded shapes. CLMP = 12.723

Data Sets / 143

Fig. 6063-2

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for Strength at minimum creep rate of 6063-T6 extruded shapes. CLMP = 14.13

Fig. 6063-3

Comparison of Larson-Miller parametric master curves for stress rupture strengths of 6063-T5 and 6063-T6 extruded shapes. CLMP = 20

144 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Casting Alloys A201.0-T7 Table A201-1 tions of CLMP

Stress rupture strengths of A201.0-T7 permanent mold castings at various temperatures and isostress calcula-

Temperature (T)

Stress,

Time (t),

ksi 50.0 45.0 48.0 44.0 38.0 40.0 35.0 30.0 24.0 17.0

h 155 1092 9 42.5 375 5 44.5 255 89 34

o

F

o

300

760

350

810

400

860

450 500

910 960

R

Isostress, Temperature (T1) Time (t), o o ksi F R h

48.0 45.0 40.0 38.0 35.0

300 300 350 350 350

760 760 810 810 810

330 1092 190 375 1000

CLMP = 22

C + log t T(C + log t) 24.2 18,384 25.0 19,290 23.0 18,593 23.6 19,139 24.6 19,905 22.7 19,521 23.6 20,337 24.4 20,990 23.9 21,794 23.5 22,590

log t

2.190 3.038 0.954 1.628 2.574 0.699 1.648 2.407 1.949 1.531

Temperature (T2) log t1

2.519 3.038 2.279 2.574 3.000

o

T1 log t1

F

1914.4 2308.9 1846.0 2084.9 2430.0

350 350 400 400 400

R

Time (t2), h

log t2

T2 log t2

810 810 860 860 860

9 30 5 18 44.5

0.954 1.477 0.699 1.255 1.648

772.7 1196.4 601.1 1079.3 1417.3

o

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

1141.7 1112.5 1244.9 1005.6 1012.7 Average CLMP =

50 50 50 50 50

55

50

Stress rupture strength, ksi

45

40

35

30

Test temperature °F °R 300 760 350 810 400 860 450 910 500 960

25

20

CLMP = 21.1

15

0

Fig. A201.0-1

0

17 18 19 20 21 Larson-Miller Parameter (LMP)/103

22

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of A201.0-T7 sand castings. CLMP = 21.1

CLMP

22.8 22.3 24.9 20.1 20.3 22.1

Data Sets / 145

224.0-T63 Table 224-1 Stress rupture strengths of 224.0-T6 sand castings at various temperatures and isostress calculations of CLMP Temperature (T) °F

°R

300

760

400

860

450

910

500

960

550

1010

600

1060

650

1110

700

1160

750

1210

Table 224.2

Stress, ksi

42.0 36.0 33.0 31.0 28.0 38.0 33.0 25.0 20.0 29.0 25.0 20.0 16.5 23.5 20.0 16.5 13.5 12.0 10.0 15.0 13.5 15.0 11.0 11.0 10.0 8.0 5.5 10.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 4.0

7.5 127 210 340 >1000 0.15 1.3 41 490 0.56 4.1 53 352 0.85 9 69 116 616 646 28 37 3.75 54.5 0 0 0 0 14 167.5 35 76 8.5

CLMP = 16

CLMP = 20

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

0.869 2.104 2.322 2.531 3.000 –0.824 0.114 1.613 2.690 –0.252 0.612 1.724 2.547 –0.071 0.954 1.839 2.064 2.790 2.811 1.447 1.568 0.574 1.736 0.556 1.061 1.362 1.531 1.146 2.224 1.544 1.881 0.929

13.9 15.1 15.3 15.5 16.0 12.2 13.1 14.6 15.7 12.7 13.6 14.7 15.5 12.9 14.0 14.8 15.1 15.8 15.8 14.4 14.6 13.6 14.7 13.6 14.1 14.4 14.5 14.1 15.2 14.5 14.9 13.9

10,540 11,479 11,645 11,804 12,160 10,471 11,278 12,567 13,493 11,601 12,387 13,399 14,148 12,412 13,396 14,245 14,461 15,158 15,179 14,591 14,714 14,388 15,620 14,369 14,905 15,224 15,403 15,702 16,899 16,871 17,262 16,854

16.9 18.1 18.3 18.5 19.0 15.2 16.1 17.6 18.7 15.7 16.6 17.7 18.5 15.9 17.0 17.8 18.1 18.8 18.8 17.4 17.6 16.6 17.7 16.6 17.1 17.4 17.5 17.1 18.2 17.5 17.9 16.9

12,820 13,759 13,925 14,084 14,440 13,051 13,858 15,147 16,073 14,331 15,117 16,129 16,878 15,292 16,276 17,125 17,341 18,038 18,059 17,621 17,744 17,568 18,800 17,549 18,085 18,404 18,583 19,032 20,229 20,351 20,742 20,484

20.9 22.1 22.3 22.5 23.0 19.2 20.1 21.6 22.7 19.7 20.6 21.7 22.5 19.9 21.0 21.8 22.1 22.8 22.8 21.4 21.6 20.6 21.7 20.6 21.1 21.4 21.5 21.1 22.2 21.5 21.9 20.9

15,860 16,799 16,965 17,124 17,480 16,491 17,298 18,587 19,513 17,971 18,757 19,769 20,518 19,132 20,116 20,965 21,181 21,878 21,899 21,661 21,784 21,808 23,040 21,789 22,325 22,644 22,823 23,472 24,669 24,991 25,382 25,324

Isostress calculations for stress rupture strengths of 224.0-T62 sand castings

Isostress, Temperature (T1) ksi °F °R

Time (t1), h

33.0 28.0 25.0 20.0 20.0 16.5 15.0 13.5 15.0 15.0 13.5 10.0 6.0 4.0

210 1000 0.91 41 53 352 100 116 100 28 37 120 167.5 76

300 300 400 400 450 450 500 500 500 550 550 600 650 700

CLMP = 13 Time (t), h

760 760 860 860 910 910 960 960 960 1010 1010 1060 1110 1160

Temperature (T2) log t1

T1 log t1

2.322 3.000 –0.041 1.613 1.724 2.547 2.000 2.064 2.000 1.447 1.568 2.079 2.224 1.881

1764.7 2280.0 –35.3 1387.2 1568.8 2317.8 1920.0 1981.4 1920.0 1461.5 1583.7 2203.7 2468.6 2182.0

F

o

400 400 450 450 500 500 550 550 600 600 600 650 700 750

860 860 910 910 960 960 1010 1010 1060 1060 1060 1110 1160 1210

o

R

Time (t2), h

1.3 0.2 0.046 4.1 9.0 69.0 28 37 3.75 3.75 10 14 35 8.5

log t2

T2 log t2

0.114 –0.693 –1.337 0.612 0.954 1.839 1.447 1.568 0.574 0.574 1.000 1.146 1.544 0.929

98.0 –596.0 –1216.7 556.9 915.8 1765.4 1461.5 1583.7 608.4 608.4 1060.0 1272.1 1791.0 1124.1

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

CLMP

1666.7 100 2876.0 100 1181.4 50 830.3 50 653.0 50 552.3 50 458.5 50 397.8 50 1311.6 100 853.0 50 523.7 50 931.7 50 677.6 50 1057.9 50 Overall average CLMP

16.7 28.8 23.6 16.6 13.1 11.0 9.2 8.0 13.1 17.1 10.5 18.6 13.6 21.2 15.8

146 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. 224.0-1

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 224.0-T62 sand castings. CLMP = 11.0

Fig. 224.0-2

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 224.0-T62 sand castings. CLMP = 16.0

Data Sets / 147

249.0-T63 Table 249-1 Stress rupture strengths of 249.0-T63 permanent mold castings at various temperatures and isostress calculations of CLMP Temperature (T)

CLMP = 20

Stress, ksi

Time (t), h

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

52.0 45.0 40.0 45.0 38.0 34.0 25.0 34.0 30.0 22.0

0.24 45 102 0.59 21 69 746 3.6 15 273

–0.620 1.653 2.009 –0.229 1.322 1.839 2.873 0.556 1.176 2.436

19.4 21.7 22.0 19.8 21.3 21.8 22.9 20.6 21.2 22.4

14,729 16,456 16,727 16,015 17,271 17,690 18,527 17,678 18,211 19,295

Isostress, Temperature (T1) ksi °F °R

Time (t1), h

°F

°R

300

760

350

810

400

860

45.0 42.5 34.0 30.0 25.0

300 300 350 350 350

760 760 810 810 810

45 100 69 200 746

Temperature (T2) log t1

T1 log t1

°F

°R

1.653 2.000 1.839 2.301 2.873

1256.3 1520.0 1489.6 863.8 2327.1

350 350 400 400 400

810 810 860 860 860

Time (t2), h

0.59 3.5 3.6 15 88

log t2

T2 log t2

–0.229 0.544 0.556 1.176 1.944

–185.5 440.6 478.2 1011.4 1671.8

Fig. 249.0-2

Fig. 249.0-1

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 249.0-T63 sand castings. CLMP = 12.9

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

T2 – T1

1441.8 50 1079.4 50 1011.4 50 852.5 50 655.3 50 Overall average CLMP

CLMP

28.8 21.6 20.2 17.0 13.1 20.2

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 249.0-T63 sand castings. CLMP = 20

148 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

270.0-T7

Fig. 270.0-1

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for 0.2% creep strengths of 270.0-T7 sand castings. CLMP = 26.0

354.0-T61 Table 354-1 Stress rupture strengths of 354.0-T61 permanent mold castings at various temperatures and isostress calculations of CLMP Temperature o

F

o

R

350

810

400

860

CLMP = 17

Time (t), h

log t

C + log t

T(C + log t)

C + log t

T(C + log t)

44.0 42.0 39.0 37.0 35.0 29.0 25.0 39.0 37.0 30.0 25.0 25.0 15.0 13.0

0.292 3.14 30 51.5 90 430 885 0.36 1.05 21.5 623 69.7 615 940

–0.535 0.497 1.477 1.712 1.954 2.633 2.947 –0.442 0.023 1.332 1.792 1.843 2.789 2.973

16.5 17.5 18.5 18.7 19.0 19.6 19.9 16.6 17.0 18.3 18.8 18.8 19.8 20.0

13,337 14,173 14,966 15,157 15,353 15,903 16,157 14,240 14,640 15,766 16,161 16,205 17,019 17,177

19.5 20.5 21.5 21.7 22.0 22.6 22.9 19.6 20.0 21.3 21.8 21.8 22.8 23.0

15,767 16,603 17,396 17,587 17,783 18,333 18,587 16,820 17,220 18,346 18,741 18,785 19,599 19,757

Isostress, Temperature (T1) Time (t), o o ksi F R h

log t1

T1 log t1

39.0 37.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 25.0

1.477 1.712 1.954 2.477 2.947 2.947

1196.4 1386.7 1582.7 2006.4 2387.1 2387.1

350 350 350 350 350 350

CLMP = 20

Stress, ksi

810 810 810 810 810 810

30 51.5 90 300 885 885

Temperature (T2) o

F

400 400 400 400 400 400

R

Time (t2), h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

860 860 860 860 860 860

0.36 1.05 3 21.5 623 69.7

–0.442 0.023 0.477 1.332 1.792 1.843

–380.1 19.8 410.2 1145.5 1541.1 1585.0

1576.5 1366.9 1172.5 860.9 846.0 802.1

o

T2 – T1

CLMP

50 31.5 50 27.3 50 23.5 50 17.2 50 16.9 50 16.0 Overall average = 22.1

Data Sets / 149

Fig. 354.0-1

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 354.0-T61 permanent mold castings.

CLMP = 17.0

Fig. 354.0-2 20.0

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of 354.0-T61 permanent mold castings. CLMP =

C355.0-T6 Table 355-1 Stress rupture strengths of 355.0-T6 permanent mold castings at various temperatures and isostress calculations of CLMP incorrect Temperature

°F 300

°R 760

350

810

400

860

500

960

Isostress ksi

35.0 25.0 20.0

Stress,

Time (t),

ksi 40.0 38.0 36.5 35.0 34.0 33.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 26.0 19.0 15.0 20.0 10.0 7.5

h 0.092 32 273 661 677.5 1114 14 270.5 703 36 308 653 0.367 63.0 248.0

Temperature (T1) o

F

300 350 400

CLMP = 20 log t

–1.036 1.505 2.436 2.820 2.831 3.049 1.125 2.432 2.847 1.556 2.489 2.819 –0.435 1.799 2.394

Temperature (T2)

R

Time (t), h

log t1

T1 log t1

760 810 860

661 703 200

2.820 2.847 2.301

2143.2 2306.1 1978.9

o

C + log t T(C + log t) 20.0 15,173 22.5 17,104 23.4 17,811 23.8 18,103 23.8 18,112 24.0 18,277 22.1 17,921 23.4 18,980 23.8 19,316 22.6 19,398 23.5 20,201 23.8 20,484 20.6 19,742 22.8 21,887 23.4 22,458 o

F

350 400 500

R

Time (t2), h

log t2

T2 log t2

(T1 log t1) – (T2 log t2)

810 860 960

14 50 0.367

1.125 1.699 –0.435

911.3 1461.1 –417.6

1232.0 844.9 2396.5

o

T2 – T1

CLMP

50 24.6 50 16.9 100 24.0 Overall average = 21.8

150 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

Fig. C355.0-1

Archival Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of C355.0-T6 permanent mold castings. CLMP = 14.0

Fig. C355.0-2

Larson-Miller parametric master curve for stress rupture strengths of C355.0-T6 permanent mold castings. CLMP = 21.0

Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys J. Gilbert Kaufman, p 151-152 DOI: 10.1361/paht2008p151

Copyright © 2008 ASM International® All rights reserved. www.asminternational.org

Appendix 1

Aluminum Alloy and Temper Designation Systems Table A1.1 Designation system for wrought aluminum alloys

The aluminum alloy and temper designation system was developed by and is administered by the Aluminum Association, Inc., and is published both in Aluminum Standards and Data (The Aluminum Association, Arlington, VA, 2006) and as American Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard H35.1. This system is now recognized worldwide under the International Accord for Aluminum Alloy Designation. The original system was recognized primarily for wrought alloys, but more recently the parallel system for casting alloys has also been widely used.

Alloy series

1xxx 2xxx 3xxx 4xxx 5xxx 6xxx 7xxx 8xxx 9xxx

Alloy Designations Aluminum alloy designations are divided into two types depending on how they are produced: wrought products (sheet and plate, extruded shapes, forgings, and rolled shapes) or cast products (sand castings, die castings, permanent mold castings, etc.). As indicated, the wrought category is a broad one, since aluminum alloys may be shaped by virtually every known process. Cast alloys are those that are poured molten into sand (sand casting) or high-strength steel (permanent mold or die casting) molds and are allowed to solidify to produce the desired shape. Ingot to be subsequently fabricated into wrought products is designated by the wrought alloy system. Each wrought or cast aluminum alloy is designated by a number to distinguish it as a wrought or cast alloy and to categorize the alloy. A wrought alloy is given a four-digit number. The first digit classifies the alloy by alloy series, or principal alloying element. The second digit, if different than 0, denotes a modification in the basic alloy. The third and fourth digits form an arbitrary number that identifies the specific alloy in the series. The categories of wrought alloys are shown in Table A1.1. Cast alloys are assigned a three-digit number followed by a decimal point and a fourth digit. As for wrought alloys, the first digit signifies the alloy series or principal addition; the second and third digits identify the specific alloy; the digit after the decimal point indicates whether the alloy composition is for the final casting (0.0) or for ingot (0.1 or 0.2). A capital letter prefix (A, B, C, etc.) indicates a modification of the basic alloy. The categories of cast alloys are shown in Table A1.2.

Description or major alloying element

99.00% minimum aluminum Copper Manganese Silicon Magnesium Magnesium and silicon Zinc Other element Unused series

Table A1.2 Designation system for cast aluminum alloys Alloy series

1xx.x 2xx.x 3xx.x 4xx.x 5xx.x 6xx.x 7xx.x 8xx.x 9xx.x

Description for major alloying element

99.00% minimum aluminum Copper Silicon plus copper and/or magnesium Silicon Magnesium Unused series Zinc Tin Other elements

Temper Designations Specification of an aluminum alloy is not complete without designating the metallurgical condition, or temper, of the alloy. A temper designation system, unique for aluminum alloys, was developed by the Aluminum Association and is used for all wrought and cast alloys. The temper designation follows the alloy designation, the two being separated by a hyphen. Basic temper designations consist of letters; subdivisions, where required, are indicated by one or more digits following the letter. The basic tempers are:

•

•

F—As-Fabricated. Applies to the products of shaping processes in which no special control over thermal conditions or strain hardening is employed. For wrought products, there are no mechanical property limits. O—Annealed. Applies to wrought products that are annealed to obtain the lowest strength temper and to cast products that

152 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

•

•

•

are annealed to improve ductility and dimensional stability. The O may be followed by a digit other than zero. H—Strain-Hardened (Wrought Products Only). Applies to products that have their strength increased by strain hardening, with or without supplementary thermal treatments to produce some reduction in strength. The H is always followed by two or more digits (see Table A1.3). W—Solution Heat Treated. An unstable temper applicable only to alloys that spontaneously age at room temperature after solution heat treatment. This designation is specific only when the period of natural aging is indicated, for example, W l/2 hr. T—Thermally Treated to Produce Stable Tempers Other than F, O, or H. Applies to products that are thermally treated, with or without supplementary strain hardening, to produce stable tempers. The T is always followed by one or more digits (see Table A1.4).

Table A1.3

Subdivisions of H temper: strain hardened

First digit indicates basic operations: H1—Strain hardened only H2—Strain hardened and partially annealed H3—Strain hardened and stabilized H4—Strain hardened, lacquered, or painted Second digit indicates degree of strain hardening: HX2—Quarter hard HX4—Half hard HX8—Full hard HX9—Extra hard Third digit indicates variation of two-digit temper.

The major subdivision indicating more detailed variations within the H and T tempers are covered in Tables A1.3 and A1.4. For more detailed information about the Aluminum Association aluminum alloy and temper systems, readers are referred to Aluminum Standards and Data, English and metric editions, The Aluminum Association, Arlington, VA, 2006. Table A1.4

Subdivisions of T temper: thermally treated

First digit indicates specific sequence of treatments: T1—Cooled from an elevated-temperature shaping process and naturally aged to a substantially stable condition T2—Cooled from an elevated-temperature shaping process, cold worked, and naturally aged to a substantially stable condition T3—Solution heat treated, cold worked, and naturally aged to a substantially stable condtion T4—Solution heat treated and naturally aged to a substantially stable condition T5—Cooled from an elevated-temperature shaping process and then artificially aged T6—Solution heat treated and then artificially aged T7—Solution heat treated and overaged/stabilized T8—Solution heat treated, cold worked, and then artificially aged T9—Solution heat treated, artificially aged, and then cold worked T10—Cooled from an elevated-temperature shaping process, cold worked, and then artificially aged Second digit indicates variation in basic treatment: Examples: T42 or T62—Heat treated to temper by user Additional digits indicate stress relief: Examples: TX51 or TXX51—Stress relieved by stretching TX52 or TXX52—Stress relieved by compressing TX54 or TXX54—Stress relieved by combination of stretching and compressing

Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys J. Gilbert Kaufman, p 153-154 DOI: 10.1361/paht2008p153

Copyright © 2008 ASM International® All rights reserved. www.asminternational.org

Appendix 2

Terminology and Nomenclature The following list of terms is associated primarily with aluminum alloys and products and with parametric analysis of creep data. The list is not intended to include every term likely to be used within the aluminum industry, but it is hoped that most of the terms that are unique to the industry are defined. Many of these terms come from the Aluminum Association publication Aluminum Standards and Data and are republished with the permission of the Aluminum Association. ANSI. American National Standards Institute ASME. American Society of Mechanical Engineers AWS. American Welding Society age hardening. An aging process that results in increased strength and hardness aging. Precipitation from solid solution resulting in a change in properties of an alloy, usually occurring slowly at room temperature (natural aging) and more rapidly at elevated temperatures (artificial aging). annealing. A thermal treatment to soften metal by removal of stress resulting from cold working or by coalescing precipitates from solid solution. artificial aging. See aging casting (noun). An object formed by pouring or pumping molten metal into a mold or set of dies and allowing it to solidify. casting (verb). The act of pouring or pumping molten metal into a mold (made of sand, metal, ceramic, or graphite) or a set of metal dies. cold working. Plastic (i.e., permanent) deformation of metal at such temperature and rate that strain hardening occurs. corrosion, exfoliation. Corrosion that progresses approximately parallel to the metal surface, causing layers of the metal to be elevated by the formation of corrosion product. corrosion, galvanic. Corrosion associated with the current of galvanic cell consisting of two dissimilar conductors in an electrolyte or two similar conductors in dissimilar electrolytes. Aluminum will corrode if it is anodic to the dissimilar metal. corrosion, intergranular. Corrosion occurring preferentially at grain boundaries (also termed “intercrystalline corrosion”). corrosion, pitting. Localized corrosion resulting in small pits or craters in a metal surface. corrosion, stress-cracking. Failure by cracking resulting from selective directional attack caused by the simultaneous interaction of sustained tensile stress at an exposed surface with the chemical or electrochemical effects of the surface environment. The term often is abbreviated SCC or scc, which correctly stands for stress-corrosion cracking.

creep rupture. A type of loading of a material usually characterized by uniform constant loading for some period of time, either the time to develop a specific amount of strain, or until the material ruptures; also sometimes called stress rupture. creep rupture strength. Stress at fracture of a material subjected to sustained constant loading; referred to herein as stress rupture strength. creep strain. Strain induced in a material by sustained loading. die casting. A casting produced by the die casting process, injecting molten metal under pressure into a mold chamber, which is formed by metal die. elongation. The percentage increase in distance between two gage marks that results from stressing the specimen in tension to fracture. The original gage length is usually 50 mm (2 in.) for flat specimens. For cylindrical specimens, the gage length is 5D for metric usage and 4D for U.S. standards. Elongation values depend to some extent on size and form of the test specimen. For example, the values obtained from sheet specimens will be lower for thin sheet than for thicker sheet; those obtained in 5D will be lower than those for 4D. endurance limit. The limiting stress below which a material will withstand a specified large number of cycles of stress. extrusion. A product formed by pushing material through a die. fatigue. The tendency for a metal to break under conditions of repeated cyclic stressing considerably below the ultimate tensile strength. filler alloy. The alloy used as weld wire in gas metal arc welding aluminum alloys. forging. A product formed to the required shape and size by working in impression dies. fracture toughness. A generic term for measure of resistance to low-ductility extension of a crack. The term is sometimes restricted to results of a fracture mechanics test, which is directly applicable in fracture control. It may also be measured in relative terms by notch-tensile or tear testing. grain size. A measure of crystal size usually reported in terms of average diameter in millimeters, grains per square millimeter, or grains per cubic millimeter. hardness. Resistance to plastic deformation, usually by indentation. The term also may refer to stiffness or temper, or to resistance to scratching, abrasion, or cutting. heat treatable alloy. An alloy that may be strengthened by a suitable thermal treatment. heat treating. Heating and cooling a solid metal or alloy in such a way as to obtain desired conditions or properties. Commonly used

154 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys as a shop term to denote a thermal treatment to increase strength. Heating for the sole purpose of hot working is excluded from the meaning of this definition. See solution heat treating; aging. ingot. A cast form suitable for remelting or fabricating. long transverse direction. For plate, sheet, and forgings, the direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction that is also at right angles to the thickness of the product. See also longitudinal and short transverse directions. longitudinal direction. The direction of major metal flow in a working operation. See also long and short transverse directions. mechanical properties. Those properties of a material that are associated with elastic and inelastic reaction when force is applied, or that involve the relationship between stress and strain, for example, modulus of elasticity, tensile strength, endurance limit. These properties often are incorrectly referred to as physical properties. microporosity. Extremely fine porosity in castings caused by shrinkage or gas evolution, apparent on radiographic film as mottling. modulus of elasticity. The ratio of stress to corresponding strain throughout the range where they are proportional. As there are three kinds of stresses, so there are three kinds of moduli of elasticity for any material modulus in tension, in compression, and in shear. natural aging. See aging offset. Yield strength by the offset method is computed from a load-strain curve obtained by means of an extensometer. A straight line is drawn parallel to the initial straight line portion of the load-strain curve and at a distance to the right corresponding to 0.2% offset (0.002 mm per mm, or 0.002 in. per in., of gage length). The load reached at the point where this straight line intersects the curve divided by the original cross-sectional area (mm2, or in.2) of the tension test specimen is the yield strength. parameter. A compound factor involving two or more independent variables, such as time and temperature. parametric analysis. Analysis of some property or characteristic by a compound factor involving two or more variables such as time and temperature. permanent-mold casting. A casting process that uses a long-life mold, usually metal, into which molten metal is poured by gravity. Metals cast are usually aluminum alloys, although a few producers pour iron into water-cooled metal dies. physical properties. The properties, other than mechanical properties, that pertain to the physics of a material, for example, density, electrical conductivity, heat conductivity, thermal expansion. precipitation hardening. See aging precipitation heat treating. See aging preheating. A high-temperature soaking treatment to provide a desired metallurgical structure. Homogenizing is a form of preheating. quenching. Controlled rapid cooling of a metal from an elevated temperature by contact with a liquid, a gas, or a solid. sand castings. Metal castings produced in sand molds. shear strength. The maximum stress that a material is capable of sustaining in shear.

short transverse direction. For wrought products, the direction through the thickness perpendicular to both longitudinal and long transverse directions. solution heat treating. Heating an alloy at a suitable temperature for sufficient time to allow soluble constituents to enter into solid solution where they are retained in a supersaturated state after quenching. specimen. That portion of a sample taken for evaluation of some specific characteristic or property. stabilizing. A low-temperature thermal treatment designed to prevent age softening in certain strain-hardened alloys containing magnesium. strain. A measure of the change in size or shape of a body under stress, referred to its original size or shape. Tensile or compressive strain is the change, due to force, per unit of length in an original linear dimension in the direction of the applied force. strain hardening. Modification of a metal structure by cold working, resulting in an increase in strength and hardness with a loss in ductility. stress. Force per unit of area. Stress is normally calculated on the basis of the original cross-sectional dimensions. The three kinds of stresses are tensile, compressive, and shear. stress-corrosion cracking (SCC). See corrosion, stress-cracking stress rupture. A type of loading of a material usually characterized by uniform constant loading for some period of time, either the time to develop a specific amount of strain, or until the material ruptures; also sometimes called creep rupture. stress rupture strength. Stress at fracture of a material subjected to sustained constant loading; also sometimes referred to as creep rupture strength. temper. The condition produced by either mechanical or thermal treatment, or both, and characterized by a certain structure and mechanical properties. tensile strength. In tensile testing, the ratio of maximum load to original cross-sectional area; also called ultimate tensile strength or ultimate strength. ultimate tensile strength. See tensile strength welding. Joining two or more pieces of aluminum by applying heat or pressure, or both, with or without filler metal (GMAC or MIG and GTIC or TIG, respectively), to produce a localized union through fusion or recrystallization across the interface. (Cold welding is a solid-state welding process in which pressure is used at room temperature to produce coalescence of metals with substantial deformation at the weld.) welding wire. Aluminum alloy wire for use as filler metal in joining by welding; also called filler alloy. work hardening. See strain hardening wrought product. A product that has been subjected to mechanical working by such processes as rolling, extruding, forging, and so on. yield strength. The stress at which a material exhibits a specified permanent set during tensile, compressive, or shear loading. The offset used for aluminum and its alloys is 0.2% of gage length.

Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys J. Gilbert Kaufman, p 155-158 DOI: 10.1361/paht2008p155

Copyright © 2008 ASM International® All rights reserved. www.asminternational.org

Appendix 3

Nominal Compositions and Typical Mechanical Properties of Some Aluminum Alloys Table A3.1 Alloy

Nominal compositions of wrought aluminum alloy Silicon, %

Copper, %

Manganese, %

Magnesium, %

Chromium, %

Nickel, %

Zinc, %

Titanium, %

1xxx(a)

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

2024 2219(b)

... ...

4.4 6.3

0.6 0.30

1.5 ...

... ...

... ...

... ...

... 0.06

3003 3004

... ...

0.12 ...

1.2 1.2

... 1

... ...

... ...

... ...

... ...

4043

5.2

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

5050 5052 5083 5154 5183 5356 5454 5456 5554

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... 0.7 ... 0.8 0.12 0.8 0.8 0.8

1.4 2.5 4.4 3.5 4.8 5.0 2.7 5.1 2.7

... 0.25 0.15 0.25 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... 0.13 ... ... 0.12

6061 6063

0.6 0.40

0.28 ...

... ...

1.0 0.7

0.20 ...

... ...

... ...

... ...

Note: From Aluminum Standards and Data, The Aluminum Association, 2006. Values are nominal, i.e., middle range of limits for elements for which a composition range is specified. Aluminum and normal impurities constitute balance of composition. (a) Percent minimum aluminum: for 1060, 99.60%; for 1100, 99.00%; for 1145, 99.45%; for 1350, 99.50%. (b) Also contains 0.10% V plus 0.18% Zr.

Table A3.2 Alloy

Nominal compositions of aluminum alloy castings Silicon, %

Copper, %

Manganese, %

Magnesium, %

Chromium, %

Nickel, %

Zinc, %

Titanium, %

A201.0(a) 224.0 249.0 270(b)

...

4.5 5.0 4.2

0.30 0.35 0.38 ...

0.25

...

...

...

0.25

0.38 ...

... ...

... ...

3.0 ...

0.18 ...

354.0

9.0

1.8

...

0.5

...

...

...

...

C355.0

5.0

1.25

...

0.5

...

...

...

...

Note: Based on casting industry handbooks. Values are nominal, i.e., average of range of limits for elements for which a range is shown; values are representative of separately cast test bars, not of specimens taken from commercial castings. Aluminum and normal impurities constitute balance of composition. (a) Also contains 0.7% Ag. (b) Not published.

156 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table A3.3

Typical mechanical properties of wrought aluminum alloys Tension

Alloy & temper

Ultimate strength, ksi

Yield strength, ksi

2 in.(a), %

4D(b), %

1100-O 1100-H12 1100-H14 1100-H16 1100-H18 2024-T861 2219-T6 2219-T851 3003-O 3003-H12 3003-H14 3003-H16 3003-H18 3004-O 3004-H32 3004-H34 3004-H36 3004-H38 5050-O 5050-H32 5050-H34 5050-H36 5050-H38 5052-O 5052-H32 5052-H34 5052-H36 5052-H38 5083-O 5083-H116 5083-H321 5154-O 5154-H32 5154-H34 5154-H36 5154-H38 5454-O 5454-H32 5454-H34 5454-H111 5456-O 5456-H116 5456-H321 6061-O 6061-T4, T451 6061-T6, T651 6063-O 6063-T4 6063-T5 6063-T6 6063-T83

13 16 18 21 24 72 60 66 16 19 22 26 29 26 31 35 38 41 21 25 28 30 32 28 33 38 40 42 42 46 46 35 39 42 45 48 36 40 44 38 45 51 51 18 35 45 13 25 27 35 37

5 15 17 20 22 65 42 51 6 18 21 25 27 10 25 29 33 36 8 21 24 26 29 13 28 31 35 37 21 33 33 17 30 33 36 39 17 30 35 26 23 37 37 8 21 40 7 13 21 31 35

35 12 9 6 5 ... 10 10 30 10 8 5 4 20 10 9 5 5 24 9 8 7 6 25 12 10 8 7 ... ... ... 27 15 13 12 10 22 10 10 14 ... ... ... 25 22 12 ... 22 12 12 9

45 25 20 17 15 6 ... ... 40 20 16 14 10 25 17 12 9 6 ... ... ... ... ... 30 18 14 10 8 22 16 16 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 24 16 16 30 25 17 ... ... ... ... ...

Elongation

Hardness Brinell Number 500 kg/10 mm

23 28 32 38 44 135 ... ... 28 35 40 47 55 45 52 63 70 77 36 46 53 58 63 47 60 68 73 77 ... ... ... 58 67 73 78 80 62 73 81 70 90 90 30 65 95 25 ... 60 73 82

Shear ultimate strength, ksi

Fatigue endurance limit(c), ksi

Modulus(d) of elasticity 103, ksi

9 10 11 12 13 42 ... ... 11 12 14 15 16 16 17 18 20 21 15 17 18 19 20 18 20 21 23 24 25 ... ... 22 22 24 26 28 23 24 26 23 ... 30 30 12 24 30 10 ... 17 22 22

5 6 7 9 9 18 15 15 7 8 9 10 10 14 15 15 16 16 12 13 13 14 14 16 17 18 19 20 ... 23 23 17 18 19 20 21 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 9 14 14 8 ... 10 10 ...

10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.6 10.6 10.6 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0

Note: From Aluminum Standards and Data, The Aluminum Association, 2006. Values are representative of separately cast test bars, not of specimens taken from commercial castings. For tensile yield strengths, offset = 0.2%. (a) Elongation measured over a 2 in. gage length on 1/16 in. thick sheet-type specimens. (b) Elongation measured over 2 in. gage length (4D) in 1/2 in. diameter specimens. (c) Based on 500,000,000 cycles of completely reversed stress using R.R. Moore type of machines and specimens. (d) Average of tension and compression moduli; compressive modulus is nominally about 2% greater than the tension modulus.

Appendix 3: Nominal Compositions and Typical Mechanical Properties of Some Aluminum Alloys / 157 Table A3.3M

Typical mechanical properties of wrought aluminum alloys—Metric Tension

Alloy & temper

1100-O 1100-H12 1100-H14 1100-H16 1100-H18 2024-T851 2219-T62 2219-T81, T851 3003-O 3003-H12 3003-H14 3003-H16 3003-H18 3004-O 3004-H32 3004-H34 3004-H36 3004-H38 5050-O 5050-H32 5050-H34 5050-H36 5050-H38 5052-O 5052-H32 5052-H34 5052-H36 5052-H38 5083-O 5083-H116 5083-H321 5154-O 5154-H32 5154-H34 5154-H36 5154-H38 5454-O 5454-H32 5454-H34 5454-H111 5456-O 5456-H116 5456-H321 6061-O 6061-T4, T451 6061-T6, T651 6063-O 6063-T4 6063-T5 6063-T6 6063-T83

Ultimate strength, MPa

90 110 125 145 165 495 415 455 110 130 150 175 200 180 215 240 260 285 145 170 190 205 220 195 230 260 275 290 290 315 315 240 270 290 310 330 250 275 305 260 310 350 350 125 240 310 90 170 185 240 255

Yield strength, MPa

35 105 115 140 150 460 290 350 40 125 145 170 185 70 170 200 230 250 55 145 165 180 200 90 195 215 240 255 145 230 230 115 205 230 250 270 115 205 240 180 160 255 255 55 145 275 50 90 145 215 240

Elongation 50 mm(a), %

35 12 9 6 5 6 10 10 30 10 8 5 4 20 10 9 5 5 24 9 8 7 6 25 12 10 8 7 ... ... ... 27 15 13 12 10 22 10 10 14 ... ... ... 25 22 12 ... 22 12 12 9

5D(b), %

42 22 18 15 13 ... ... ... 37 18 14 12 9 22 15 10 8 5 ... ... ... ... ... 27 16 12 9 7 20 14 14 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 22 14 14 27 22 15 ... ... ... ... ...

Hardness Brinell number 500 kg/10 mm

23 28 32 38 44 135 ... ... 28 35 40 47 55 45 52 63 70 77 36 46 53 58 63 47 60 68 73 77 ... ... ... 58 67 73 78 80 62 73 81 70 ... 90 90 30 65 95 25 ... 60 73 82

Shear ultimate strength, MPa

60 70 75 85 90 300 ... ... 75 85 95 105 110 110 115 125 140 145 105 115 125 130 140 125 140 145 160 165 170 ... ... 150 150 165 180 195 160 165 180 160 ... 205 205 85 165 205 70 ... 115 150 150

Fatigue endurance limit(c), MPa

35 40 50 60 60 125 105 105 50 55 60 70 70 95 105 105 110 110 85 90 90 95 95 110 115 125 130 140 ... 160 160 115 125 130 140 145 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 60 95 95 55 ... 70 70 ...

Modulus(d) of elasticity, GPa

69 69 69 69 69 73 73 73 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 70 70 70 70 70 71 71 71 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 71 71 71 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69

Note: From Aluminum Standards and Data, Metric Edition, The Aluminum Association, 2006. Values are representative of separately cast test bars, not of specimens taken from commercial castings. For tensile yield strengths, offset = 0.2%. (a) Elongation measured over a 50 mm gage length on 1.60 mm thick sheet-type specimens. (b) Elongation measured over 50 mm gage length (5D) in 12.5 mm diameter specimens. (c) Based on 500,000,000 cycles of completely reversed stress using R.R. Moore type of machines and specimens. (d) Average of tension and compression moduli; compressive modulus is nominally about 2% greater.

158 / Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys Table A3.4

Typical mechanical properties of aluminum alloy castings Tension

Alloy & temper

A201.0-T7 224.0-T72 A249.0-T63 354.0-T61 C355.0-T6

Ultimate strength, ksi

68 55 69 48 48

Yield strength, ksi

60 40 60 37 28

Elongation 2 in. or 4D, %

6 10 6 3 8

Hardness Brinell number 500 kg/10 mm

Shear ultimate strength, ksi

Fatigue endurance limit(a), ksi

Modulus of elasticity(b), 103 ksi

146 123 ... ... 90

40.00 35 ... ... ...

14 9 ... ... ...

10.5 10.5 ... ... 10.2

Note: From Aluminum Casting Technology, American Foundrymen’s Society, 1993. Values are representative of separately cast test bars, not of specimens taken from commercial castings For tensile yield strengths, offset = 0.2%. Data not published for alloy 270.0-T6. (a) Based on 500,000,000 cycles of completely reversed stress using R.R. Moore type of machines and specimens. (b) Average of tension and compression moduli; compressive modulus is nominally about 2% greater than the tension modulus.

Table A3.4M

Typical mechanical properties of some aluminum casting alloys—Metric Tension

Alloy & temper

201.0-T7 224.0-T72 A249.0-T63 354.0-T61 C355.0-T6

Ultimate strength, MPa

470 380 475 330 330

Yield strength, MPa

Elongation in 5D, %

Hardness Brinell number 500 kg/10 mm

Shear ultimate strength, MPa

Fatigue endurance limit(a), MPa

Modulus of elasticity(b), GPa

415 275 415 255 195

6 10 6 3 8

... 123 ... ... 90

... 240 ... ... ...

95 60 ... ... ...

... 73 ... ... 70

Note: From Aluminum Casting Technology, American Foundrymen’s Society, 1993. Values are representative of separately cast test bars, not of specimens taken from commercial castings For tensile yield strengths, offset = 0.2%. Data not published for alloy 270.0-T6. (a) Based on 500,000,000 cycles of completely reversed stress using R.R. Moore type of machines and specimens. (b) Average of tension and compression moduli; compressive modulus is nominally about 2% greater than the tension modulus.

Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys J. Gilbert Kaufman, p 159 DOI: 10.1361/paht2008p159

Copyright © 2008 ASM International® All rights reserved. www.asminternational.org

Appendix 4

SI/Metric Unit Conversions All of the data and archival graphs presented in this volume were originally generated in English/engineering units, and so that system of units is given greater prominence throughout the book. Where convenient, calculated conversions to International Standard (SI)/metric values are presented in secondary position. Creep and stress rupture strengths are presented in ksi (kilopounds per square inch). Conversions to SI/metric are made on the basis that 1 ksi = 6.897 MPa (megaPascals). Temperatures are presented in °F (degrees Fahrenheit). Conversions to °C (degrees Celsius) are made as 5/9(oF – 32). As noted in the section “Rate Process Theory and the Development of Parametric Relationships,” the parametric analyses discussed herein require the use of absolute temperature. Since English/engineering units are given first position, °R (degrees Rankine, equal to (°F + 460) was used in all parametric calculations. It is important to note that the results of utilizing K (degrees Kelvin), the absolute scale for SI/metric, gives exactly the same results when used in parametric analyses as does the English/engineering absolute scale. The respective values for all temperatures used in the tests presented herein are compared: Temperature conversions °F

150 200 212 250 300 350 375 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750

°R

°C

K

610 660 672 710 760 810 835 860 910 960 1010 1060 1110 1160 1210

66 93 100 121 149 177 191 204 232 260 288 316 343 371 399

339 366 373 394 422 450 464 477 505 533 561 589 616 644 672

Larson-Miller Parameter (LMP). Using the two different absolute temperature systems will result in different values of the LMP, even though the final result of extrapolation in the two systems will provide the same results. As an illustration, for a value of CLMP = 20 and a 1000 h rupture life, the respective LMP values in the two systems will be: Temperature °F

150 200 212 250 300 350 375 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750

°R

°C

K

Time (t), h

Log time

C + log t CLMP = 20

610 660 672 710 760 810 835 860 910 960 1010 1060 1110 1160 1210

66 93 100 121 149 177 191 204 232 260 288 316 343 371 399

339 366 373 394 422 450 464 477 505 533 561 589 616 644 672

1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23

LMP = T(C + log t) in °R

in K

14,030 15,180 15,456 16,330 17,480 18,630 19,205 19,780 20,930 22,080 23,230 24,380 25,530 26,680 27,830

7,787 8,426 8,579 9,065 9,703 10,342 10,662 10,981 11,620 12,259 12,898 13,537 14,176 14,815 15,453

Copyright © 2008 ASM International®. All rights reserved. Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys (#05202G)

www.asminternational.org

Index Cast Alloys 201.0-T7 permanent mold castings, stress rupture strengths at various temperatures and isostress calculations, 144(T) sand castings, archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 144(F) 224.0-T6 and T62 sand castings LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 11.0 and 16.0), 146(F) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures and isostress calculations, 145(T) 249.0-T63 permanent mold castings, stress rupture strengths at various temperatures and isostress calculations, 147(T) sand castings, archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 12.9 and 20), 147(F) 270.0-T7 sand castings, archival LMP 0.2 % creep strengths master curve, 148(F) 354.0-T61 permanent mold castings archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 17.0 and 20.0), 149(F) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures and isostress calculations, 148(T) 355.0-T6 permanent mold castings archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 14.0 and 20.0), 150(F) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures and isostress calculations, 149(T)

Wrought Alloys 1100-H14 short-life isostress calculations, 28(T) short-life stress rupture strength LMP calculations, 29(T) short-life stress rupture strength LMP master curves, 37(F) stress rupture strength data summary, 5 stress rupture strength long-life test results vs. extrapolated values, 30(T) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 23(T), 33(F) 1100-H18 archival LMP master curve (plate), 40(F) archival LMP master curve (rod), 39(F) stress rupture strength at various temperatures and CLMP isostress calculations, 31(T) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 23(T) 1100-O archival DSP stress rupture strength master curve, 35(F) archival LMP 0.1% creep strength master curve, 37(F) archival LMP 0.2% creep strength master curve, 38(F) archival LMP 0.5% creep strength master curve, 38(F) archival LMP 1% creep strength master curve, 39(F) archival LMP master curve, 34(F) archival MHP stress rupture strength master curve, 35(F) archival stress rupture strength LMP master curve, short-life data, 36(F) archival stress rupture strength LMP master curve with varying CLMP, 36(F) long-time extrapolated stresses, 26(T)

MHP constant determinations, 34(F) short-life isostress calculations, 28(T) short-life stress rupture strength LMP calculations, 29(T) stress rupture strength data summary, 5 stress rupture strength long-life test results vs. extrapolated values, 30(T) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 23(T), 32(F) stress rupture strengths with four CLMP values, 24–25(T) 2024-T851 archival activation energy calculations, 42(T) archival DSP stress rupture strength master curve, 47(F) archival isostress calculations for CLMP, 41(T) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 43(F) archival MHP stress rupture strengths master curve, 46(F) archival stress rupture strength extrapolations to 10,000 hours, 48(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve with varying CLMP, 48(F) MHP constant determinations, 45(F) semi-log archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 49(F) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 42(F), 43(F), 44(F) stress rupture strengths data summary, 5–6 stress rupture strengths with isostress calculations, 41(T) 2219-T6 forgings Cartesian and semilog LMP archival stress rupture strengths master curves, 55(F) semi-log LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 54(F) stress rupture strengths with isostress calculations, 51(T) 2219-T851 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 53(F) extrapolated long-life stress rupture strengths, 52(T) isostress calculations, 52(T) stress rupture strengths with isostress calculations, 50(T) 3003-H12 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 62(F) isostress calculations, 58(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 63(F) stress rupture data, 56(T) 3003-H14 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 62(F) isostress calculations, 58(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 63(F) stress rupture data, 57(T) 3003-H18 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 63(F) isostress calculations, 58(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 63(F) stress rupture data, 57(T) 3003-O archival DSP stress rupture strengths master curve, 61(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 59(F), 60(F) archival MHP stress rupture strengths master curve, 61(F) isostress calculations, 58(T) LMP constant value effect, long-time extrapolated stresses, 58(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 63(F) MHP constant determinations, 60(F) stress rupture data, 56(T) stress rupture strength extrapolation to 100,000 hours, 62(F) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 58(F), 59(F) stress rupture strengths data summary, 6 3004-H14, stress rupture data, 64(T) 3004-H18, stress rupture data, 64(T)

162 / Index 3004-H19, stress rupture data, 65(T) 3004-H32 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 66(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 67(F) stress rupture data, 64(T) 3004-H34, stress rupture data, 64(T) 3004-H38 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 67(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 67(F) stress rupture data, 64(T) 3004-H39, stress rupture data, 65(T) 3004-O archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 66(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 67(F) stress rupture data, 64(T) 4043 and 5356, as-welded with 6061-T651 LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison (tested as-welded), 140(F) 4043, as-welded with 6061-T651 heat treated and aged after welding, LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison, 140(F) heat treated and aged after welding, stress rupture data and isostress calculations, 123(T) isostress calculations, 119(T) stress rupture strengths, 117–118(T) supplemental stress rupture strengths for different lots, 120–121(T) 4043 filler alloy, as-welded with 6061-T6 archival LMP minimum creep rate strengths master curve (Lot A), 138(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (Lot B, CLMP = 13.7), 136(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (Lot C, CLMP = 21.3), 137(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 21.7, 24.647, and 25.3), 135(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 27.0 and 29.0), 136(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (Lot B, CLMP = 15.4 and 16.9), 137(F) composite archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (CLMP = 20.3), 138(F) extrapolated stress rupture strengths, CLMP variations comparison (Lots A, B, and C), 122(T) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 134(F) tested as-welded, LMP stress rupture strengths mastercurves comparison, 139(F) 5050-O archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 69(F) stress rupture data, 68(T) 5052-H32 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 74(F) isostress calculations, 73(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve comparison, 75(F) stress rupture data, 70–71(T) 5052-H34 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 74(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve comparison, 75(F) stress rupture data, 71(T) 5052-H38 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 75(F) isostress calculations, 73(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve comparison, 75(F) stress rupture data, 71(T) 5052-H112 5052 plate of various tempers, LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison, 77(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves, 76–77(F) AW 5052 filler wire, stress rupture data, 72(T) isostress calculations, 73(T) stress rupture data, 71(T) 5052-O archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 73(F) isostress calculations, 73(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve comparison, 75(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison with 5083 and 5456, 111(F)

stress rupture data, 70(T) weld stress rupture strengths comparison with 5083 and 5456 plate, 107(T) 5083-H321 AW 5183 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (CLMP = 14.9), 81(F) isostress calculations, 80(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (CLMP = 16.6), 81(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison with 5052 and 5456, 111(F) stress rupture data, 78–79(T) weld stress rupture strengths comparison with 5052 and 5456 plate, 107(T) 5154-O archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 83(F) isostress calculations, 83(T) stress rupture data, 82(T) 5454-H32 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (CLMP = 15.5), 100(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 16.3 and 17.06), 101(F) 5454-H32 AW 5554 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 103(F) isostress calculations, 91(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve comparison with 5454-O and 5454-H34, 104(F) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 90(T) 5454-H34 archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (CLMP = 14.3), 102(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (rolled and drawn rod), 103(F) isostress calculations, 91(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve comparison with 5454-O and 5454-H32 welded with 5554, 104(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison with 6061-T651, 141(F) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 88(T) stress rupture strengths comparison with 6061-T651, 125–126(T) 5454-O archival CLMP isostress calculations, 84(T) archival DSP activation energy calculations, 84(T) archival DSP stress rupture strengths master curve, 96(F) archival LMP minimum creep rate strengths master curves (Lot B plate, CLMP = 17.595 and 15.735), 99(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (CLMP = 14.3), 93(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (CLMP = 15.375), 98(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (Lot 2 plate), 98(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (rolled and drawn rod and Lot 1 plate), 97(F) archival MHP stress rupture strengths master curve, 95(F) isostress calculations, 91(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve comparison with 5454-H34 and 5454-H32 AW 5554, 104(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (various CLMP values), 100(F) long-life stress rupture strengths test results vs. short-life extrapolated values, 89(T) lot-to-lot variation effects on LMP extrapolated stresses, 85(T) MHP constant determinations, 94(F) semi-log archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 104(F) stress rupture strength data summary, 6–7 stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 92(F) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures with LMP calculations, 86–87(T) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures with LMP extrapolations, 94(F) 5456-H116, short-time high-temperature exposure calculations, 106(T) 5456-H321 AW 5556, LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 13 and 14.6), 108(f) AW 5556, LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison with 5052 and 5083, 111(f)

Index / 163 AW 5556, stress rupture data and isostress calculations, 105(T) AW 5556, weld stress rupture comparisons with 5052 and 5083 plate, 107(T) high-temperature tensile properties, 106(T) isostress calculations of CLMP, 106(T) LMP tensile yield strengths master curves (CLMP = 46 and 54), 110(T) tensile properties and tensile yield strengths at various temperatures, 109(F) 6061-T6 archival LMP minimum creep rate strength master curve, 134(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (except extrusions), 128(F) as-welded with 4043 filler alloy archival LMP minimum creep rate strengths master curve (Lot A), 138(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (Lot B, CLMP = 13.7), 136(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (Lot C, CLMP = 21.3), 137(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 21.7, 24.647, and 25.3), 135(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 27.0 and 29.0), 136(F) archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curves (Lot B, CLMP = 15.4 and 16.9), 137(F) composite archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (CLMP = 20.3), 138(F) extrapolated stress rupture strengths, CLMP variations comparison (Lots A, B, and C), 122(T) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 134(F) tested as-welded, LMP stress rupture strengths mastercurves comparison, 139(F) AW 5356, archival LMP stress rupture strengths master curve, 139(F) isostress calculations, 115(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison with 6061-T651, 130(F) stress rupture data, 114(T) 6061-T651 archival LMP 0.1% creep strengths master curve (rolled and drawn rod), 131(F) archival LMP 0.5% creep strengths master curve (rolled and drawn rod), 132(F) as-welded with 4043 and 5356, LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison (tested as-welded), 140(F) as-welded with 4043 heat treated and aged after welding, LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison, 140(F) heat treated and aged after welding, stress rupture data and isostress calculations, 123(T) isostress calculations, 119(T) stress rupture strengths, 117–118(T) supplemental stress rupture strengths for different lots, 120–121(T) AW 5154, stress rupture strengths and isostress calculations, 124(T) isostress calculations, 113(T) LMP stress rupture strengths master curve (varying CLMP values, 129(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison with 5454-H34, 141(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison with 6061-O, 130(F) LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison with 6061-T6, 130(F) long-time stress rupture test results compared with extrapolated values, 116(T) stress rupture data (1.25-inch thick plate), 112(T), 116(T) stress rupture strengths at various temperatures (long-transverse specimen), 127(F) stress rupture strengths comparison with 5454-H34, 125–126(T) 6061-T6511 archival LMP 0.1% creep strengths master curve (extruded rod), 131(F) archival LMP 0.2% creep strengths master curve (extruded rod), 132(F) archival LMP 0.5% creep strengths master curve (extruded rod), 133(F) archival LMP 1% creep strengths master curve (extruded rod), 133(F)

6061-O LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison with 6061-T651, 130(F) stress rupture data and isostress calculations, 115(T) 6063-T5, archival LMP minimum creep rate strength master curve (extruded shapes), 142(F) 6063-T5 and T6 LMP stress rupture strengths master curves comparison (extruded shapes), 143(F) stress rupture data and isostress calculations, 142(T) 6063-T6, archival LMP minimum creep rate strength master curve (extruded shapes), 143(F)

A activation energy 2024-T851 plate, archival calculations (DSP stress rupture strengths), 6, 42(T) 5454-O plate, archival calculations (DSP stress rupture strengths), 6, 84(T) Dorn-Sherby parameter and, 4 rate process theory and, 3 Alcoa/MPC program, 6061-T651 isostress calculations, 113(T) alloys, see 201-355.0 (casting alloys); 1100-6063 (wrought alloys) aluminum alloy properties overview, 1 Aluminum Association, Inc., 152 aluminum-copper alloy, see 2024-T851 aluminum-magnesium alloy, see 5454-O aluminum-manganese alloy, see 3003-O Aluminum Standards and Data, 1 archival LMP master curves overview, 13–14

C Cartesian vs. semi-log plotting, LMP extrapolations and, 9–10 casting alloys, see 201-355.0 (casting alloys) CLMP value described, 1–2 development of, 3 calculations for 1100-O and 2024-T851, 5 calculations for 3003-O and 5454-O, 6 constant value effect, 1100-O long-time extrapolated stresses, 26(T) constant value effect, 3003-O long-time extrapolated stresses, 58(T) selection of constant, effects on data extrapolations, 8–9 commercially pure aluminum, see 1100-O conversions, 159 corrosion performance, application of LMP and, 18–20 creep rupture data, software for analysis of, 14–15, 15(F), 16(F) creep strength units, 159

D Dorn-Sherby parameter, DSP described, 1 development of, 4 for 1100-O and H14, 5 for 2024-T851, 6 2024-T851 archival activation energy calculations, 42(T) 2024-T851 archival stress rupture strengths master curve, 47(F) for 3003-O, 6 3003-O archival stress rupture strengths master curve, 61(F) for 5454-O, 6 5454-O archival activation energy calculations, 84(T) 5454-O archival stress rupture strengths master curve, 96(F)

H high-temperature tensile data, application of LMP to aluminum alloys, 18

I isostress calculations 2024-T851 stress rupture strengths, 41(T)

164 / Index 2219-T6 forgings, stress rupture data and extrapolated strengths, 51(T) 2219-T851 plate, 52(T) 2219-T851 stress rupture data, 50(T) 3003-O, H12, H14, and H18, 58(T) 5050-O stress rupture data, 68(T) 5052-O, H32, H38, and H112, 73(T) 5083-H321 AW 5183, 80(T) 5154-O, 83(T) 5454-O, 5454-H34, and 5454-H32 AW 5554, 91(T) 5454-O archival CLMP calculations, 84(T) 5454-O stress rupture strengths short-life data, 89(T) 5456-H321 AW 5556, 105(T) 5456-H321 tensile and yield strengths, 106(T) 6061-0 and T6, 115(T) 6061-T651, 113(T) 6061-T651 AW 4043, 119(T) 6061-T651 AW 4043, heat treated and aged after welding, 123(T) 6063-T5 and T6, 142(T) casting alloys, 201.1-T7 permanent mold castings, 144(T) casting alloys, 224.0-T6 and T62 sand castings, 145(T) casting alloys, 249.0-T63 permanent mold castings, 147(T) casting alloys, 354.0-T61 permanent mold castings, 148(T) casting alloys, 355.0-T6 permanent mold castings, 149(T) short-life 1100-O and 1100-H14 data, 28(T) isostress plots 1100-O stress rupture strength and M-F constant determination, 34(F) 2024-T851 stress rupture strength and M-F constant determination, 45(F) rate process theory and, 3–4

L Larson-Miller parameter, see LMP limitations of parametric analysis, 12–13 LMP 1100-O and H14, short-life stress rupture strength calculations, 29(T) 6061-T6 AW 4043, stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 134(F) comparisons of different alloy products, tempers, and welds, 16–18 see also CLMP value LMP archival master curves presentation overview, 13–14 1100-H18 plate, 40(F) 1100-H18 rod, 39(F) 1100-O, 34(F) 1100-O (varying CLMP values), 36(F) 6061-T6, minimum creep rate strength, 134(F) 6061-T6 AW 4043 (Lot A), minimum creep rate strength, 138(F) 6063-T5 extruded shapes, minimum creep rate strength, 142(F) 6063-T6 extruded shapes, minimum creep rate strength, 143(F) data fitting effects, 10 LMP, casting alloys A201.0-T7 sand castings, archival stress rupture strengths master curve, 144(F) 224.0-T62 sand castings, stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 11.0 and 16.0), 146(F) 249.0-T63 sand castings, archival stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 12.9 and 20), 147(F) 270.0-T7 sand castings, archival 0.2% creep strengths master curve, 148(F) 354.0-T61 permanent mold castings, archival stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 17.0 and 20.0), 149(F) 355.0-T6 permanent mold castings, archival stress rupture strengths master curves (CLMP = 14.0 and 20.0), 150(F) LMP creep strengths master curves 1100-O 0.1%, 37(F) 1100-O 0.2%, 38(F) 1100-O 0.5%, 38(F) 1100-O 1%, 39(F) 6061-T651 archival 0.1% (rolled and drawn rod), 131(F) 6061-T651 archival 0.5% (rolled and drawn rod), 132(F) 6061-T6511 archival 0.1% (extruded rod), 131(F)

6061-T6511 archival 0.2% (extruded rod), 132(F) 6061-T6511 archival 0.5% (extruded rod), 133(F) 6061-T6511 archival 1% (extruded rod), 133(F) LMP extrapolations 1100-O stress rupture strengths, 32(F) 2024-T851 stress rupture strengths, 42(F), 44(F) 5454-O stress rupture strengths at various temperatures, 94(F) archival master curve presentation, 13–14 comparison of alloys, tempers, and products stress rupture strengths, 15–18 factors affecting usefulness of, 7–11 high-temperature tensile data for aluminum alloys, 18 limitations of, 12–13 lot-to-lot variation effects, 85(T) microstructural changes and corrosion performance, 18–20 software for creep rupture data analysis, 14–15 verification of, 11–12 LMP stress rupture strengths master curves 1100-H14 short-life data, 37(F) 2024-T851, varying CLMP, 48(F) 2024-T851 archival, 43(F) 2024-T851 semi-log archival, 49(F) 2219-T6 forgings, Cartesian and semi-log archival, 55(F) 2219-T6 forgings, semi-log, 54(F) 2219-T851 archival, 53(F) 3003-H12 and H14 archival, 62(F) 3003-H18 archival, 63(F) 3003-O archival, 59(F), 60(F) 3003-O, H12, H14, and H18, 63(F) 3004-H32 archival, 66(F) 3004-H38 archival, 67(F) 3004-O archival, 66(F) 3004-O, H32, and H38, 67(F) 5050-O archival, 69(F) 5052-H32, H34, H38, and 5052-O comparison, 75(F) 5052-H32 and H34 archival, 74(F) 5052-H38 archival, 75(F) 5052-H112 and 5052 plate of various tempers comparison, 77(F) 5052-H112 archival, 76-77(F) 5052-O archival, 73(F) 5454-H32 archival (various CLMP values), 100-101(F) 5454-H32 AW 5554 archival, 103(F) 5454-H34 archival, 102(F) 5454-H34 archival (rolled and drawn rod), 103(F) 5454-H34 comparison with 6061-T651, 141(F) 5454-O archival, 93(F) 5454-O archival (CLMP = 15.375), 98(F) 5454-O archival (Lot 2 plate), 98(F) 5454-O archival (Lot B plate), 99(F) 5454-O archival (rolled and drawn rod and Lot 1 plate), 97(F) 5454-O archival semi-log, 104(F) 5454-O archival (varying CLMP values), 100(F) 5454-O, H34, and H32 AW 5554 comparison, 104(F) 5456, 5052, and 5083 as welded, comparison, 111(F) 5456-H321 AW 5556, (CLMP = 13 and 14.6), 108(F) 6061-T6 archival (except extrusions), 128(F) 6061-T6 AW 4043 archival (composite, CLMP = 20.3), 138(F) 6061-T6 AW 4043 archival (Lot A, CLMP = 18.1), 134(F) 6061-T6 AW 4043 archival (Lot A, CLMP = 21.7, 24.647, and 25.3), 135(F) 6061-T6 AW 4043 archival (Lot A, CLMP = 27.0 and 29.0), 136(F) 6061-T6 AW 4043 archival (Lot B, CLMP = 13.7), 136(F) 6061-T6 AW 4043 archival (Lot B, CLMP = 15.4 and 16.9), 137(F) 6061-T6 AW 4043 archival (Lot C, CLMP = 21.3), 137(F) 6061-T6 AW 4043, comparison (tested as-welded), 139(F) 6061-T6 AW 5356 archival, 139(F) 6061-T651 AW 4043 and 5356, comparison (tested as-welded), 140(F) 6061-T651 AW 4043, comparison (heat treated and aged after welding, 140(F) 6061-T651 comparison with 5454-H34, 141(F) 6061-T651 (varying CLMP values), 129(F) 6063-T5 and T6 extruded shapes, comparison, 143(F) long-life test results vs. extrapolated values 1100-O and 1100-H14 stress rupture strengths, 30(T) 6061-T651 stress rupture strengths, 116(T)

Index / 165 long-time extrapolated stress rupture strengths for 1100-O, 26(T) for 2219-T851, 52(T) for 3003-O, 58(T) lot-to-lot variability, LMP extrapolations and, 8

M Manson-Haferd parameter, see MHP master curve scales and plotting precision, 10 MHP described, 1 for 1100-O, 5 1100-O archival stress rupture strengths master curve, 35(F) for 2024-T851, 6 2024-T851 archival stress rupture strengths master curve, 46(F) for 3003-O, 6 3003-O archival stress rupture strengths master curve, 61(F) for 5454-O, 6 5454-O archival stress rupture strengths master curve, 95(F) determination of constants with 1100-O stress rupture strengths isostress plots, 34(F) determination of constants with 2024-T851 stress rupture strengths isostress plots, 45(F) determination of constants with 3003-O stress rupture strengths time-temperature plots, 60(F) determination of constants with 5454-O stress rupture strengths time-temperature plots, 94(F) development of, 3–4 microstructural changes, application of LMP and, 10–11, 18–20, 19(F)

S sand molds, 154 short-life stress rupture tests 1100-H14 LMP master curves, 37(F) extrapolated values vs. long-life test results for 1100-O and 1100-H14, 30(T) stress rupture strength 1100-H14, at various temperatures, 32(F) 1100-H18 at various temperatures and CLMP isostress calculations, 31(T) 1100-O, 1100-H14, and 1100-H18 at various temperatures, 23(T) 1100-O and 1100-H14 short life strengths at various temperatures, 27(T) 1100-O and 1100-H14 summary, 5 1100-O, at various temperatures, 32(F) 1100-O with four CLMP values, 24–25(T) 2024-T851 summary, 5–6 3003-O summary, 6 5454-O summary, 6–7 long-life test results vs. extrapolated values for 1100-O and 1100-H14, 30(T) parametric relationship description, 1 units, 159

T

parametric analysis limitations, 12–13 parametric relationships, differences among and application of LMP, MHP, and DSP, 4–7 permanent mold castings, 144(T), 147(T), 148(T), 149(F), 149(T), 150(F), 151, 154

temperature conversions, 159 tensile data, high-temperature, application of LMP to aluminum alloys, 18 tensile properties 5456-H321 at various temperatures, 109(F) 5456-H321 LMP application (high-temperature), 106(T) 5456-H321 LMP tensile yield strengths master curves (CLMP = 46 and 54), 110(F) tensile yield strengths, 5456-H321 at various temperatures, 109(F) testing lab variability, LMP extrapolations and, 8

R

W

rate process theory description and overview, 1–4 rupture test reproducibility, LMP extrapolations and, 7–8

welds, stress rupture strength comparisons, 107(T) wrought alloys, see 1100-6063 (wrought alloys)

P

ASM International is the society for materials

engineers and scientists, a worldwide network dedicated to advancing industry, technology, and applications of metals and materials. ASM International, Materials Park, Ohio, USA www.asminternational.org This publication is copyright © ASM International®. All rights reserved. Publication title

Product code

Parametric Analyses of High-Temperature Data for Aluminum Alloys

#05202G

To order products from ASM International: Online Visit www.asminternational.org/bookstore Telephone 1-800-336-5152 (US) or 1-440-338-5151 (Outside US) Fax 1-440-338-4634 Mail

Customer Service, ASM International 9639 Kinsman Rd, Materials Park, Ohio 44073-0002, USA

Email [email protected]

American Technical Publishers Ltd. 27-29 Knowl Piece, Wilbury Way, Hitchin Hertfordshire SG4 0SX, In Europe United Kingdom Telephone: 01462 437933 (account holders), 01462 431525 (credit card)

www.ameritech.co.uk Neutrino Inc. In Japan Takahashi Bldg., 44-3 Fuda 1-chome, Chofu-Shi, Tokyo 182 Japan Telephone: 81 (0) 424 84 5550 Terms of Use. This publication is being made available in PDF format as a benefit to members and customers of ASM International. You may download and print a copy of this publication for your personal use only. Other use and distribution is prohibited without the express written permission of ASM International. No warranties, express or implied, including, without limitation, warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, are given in connection with this publication. Although this information is believed to be accurate by ASM, ASM cannot guarantee that favorable results will be obtained from the use of this publication alone. This publication is intended for use by persons having technical skill, at their sole discretion and risk. Since the conditions of product or material use are outside of ASM's control, ASM assumes no liability or obligation in connection with any use of this information. As with any material, evaluation of the material under end-use conditions prior to specification is essential. Therefore, specific testing under actual conditions is recommended. Nothing contained in this publication shall be construed as a grant of any right of manufacture, sale, use, or reproduction, in connection with any method, process, apparatus, product, composition, or system, whether or not covered by letters patent, copyright, or trademark, and nothing contained in this publication shall be construed as a defense against any alleged infringement of letters patent, copyright, or trademark, or as a defense against liability for such infringement.