Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8

Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Structural
Available
Available Integrity
online
online at atProcedia 00 (2017) 000–000
www.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com
Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

ScienceDirect
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia Structural
Structural IntegrityIntegrity
Procedia5 (2017) 1355–1362
00 (2016) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

2nd International Conference on Structural Integrity, ICSI 2017, 4-7 September 2017, Funchal,
2nd International Conference on Structural Integrity,
Madeira, ICSI 2017, 4-7 September 2017, Funchal,
Portugal
Madeira, Portugal
Material properties of 2024-T3 ALCLAD and 2124-T851 aluminum
Material properties
XV Portuguese Conferenceofon2024-T3
Fracture, PCF ALCLAD
2016, 10-12 and February 2124-T851
2016, Paço dealuminum
Arcos, Portugal
alloys using 2D and 3D Digital Image Correlation techniques
alloys using 2D and 3D Digital Image Correlation techniques
Thermo-mechanical modeling of a high pressure turbine blade of an
Sahand Pourhassana,a,*, Paulo J. Tavaresaa, Pedro M. G. P. Moreiraaa
Sahand Pourhassan airplane
*, Paulogas turbine
J. Tavares engine
, Pedro M. G. P. Moreira
INEGI, Universidade do Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 400, Porto 4200-465, Portugal
a
a
INEGI, Universidade do Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 400, Porto 4200-465, Portugal
P. Brandãoa, V. Infanteb, A.M. Deusc*
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa,
Abstract Portugal
b
IDMEC, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa,
Abstract
Portugal
c
CeFEMA, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa,
To characterize the rate dependency of materials using various Portugal testing machines, specimen geometries of materials
To
are characterize the rate to
oftentimes required dependency
be modified of inmaterials
order tousing
fit onvarious testing
particular machines,
testing machine.specimen geometries
Using well stablishedof standards
materials
are static
for oftentimes required
tests may to be
not be modifiedchoice
a practical in order
for to fit on
high particular
strain testing
rate testing machine.
machines Using
such well Hopkinson
as Split stablished standards
Bar. The
forAbstract
static
scope testswork
of this mayisnot be a practical
to propose choicemodified
and validate for high specimen
strain rategeometries
testing machines suchsubstitute
that could as Split Hopkinson Bar. The
standard geometries.
scope of this
Therefore, workofisexperiments
series to propose andwerevalidate
carriedmodified specimen
out on 2024-T3 geometries
ALCLAD that could substitute
and 2124-T851 aluminumstandard geometries.
alloys using Digital
During
Therefore,
Image their operation,
series
Correlation modern
oftechnique
experiments aircraft
as awere engine
carried
measurement components
on 2024-T3are
outmethod. subjectedand
ALCLAD to 2124-T851
increasinglyaluminum
demandingalloys
operating
usingconditions,
Digital
especially
Image the hightechnique
Correlation pressure turbine (HPT) blades. method.
as a measurement Such conditions cause these parts to undergo different types of time-dependent
degradation, one of which is creep. A model using the finite element method (FEM) was developed, in order to be able to predict
© 2017The
© the
2017 TheAuthors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier B.V. B.V.
© 2017creep
Peer-review
behaviour
The under
Authors. of HPT
Published
responsibility
blades.
by
of
Flight
Elsevier
the B.V.data
Scientific
records (FDR) for a specific aircraft, provided by a commercial aviation
Committee of2017
ICSI 2017.different flight cycles. In order to create the 3D model
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific
company, were used to obtain thermal and Committee of ICSI
mechanical data for three
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of ICSI 2017.
needed for the FEM analysis, a HPT blade scrap was scanned, and its chemical composition and material properties were
Keywords: Digital
obtained. Imagethat
The data Correlation; 2024-T3
was gathered wasALCLAD
fed intoaluminum
the FEMalloy;
model2124-T851 aluminum
and different alloy
simulations were run, first with a simplified 3D
Keywords: Digital Image Correlation; 2024-T3 ALCLAD aluminum alloy; 2124-T851 aluminum alloy
rectangular block shape, in order to better establish the model, and then with the real 3D mesh obtained from the blade scrap. The
overall expected behaviour in terms of displacement was observed, in particular at the trailing edge of the blade. Therefore such a
1. model
Introduction
can be useful in the goal of predicting turbine blade life, given a set of FDR data.
1. Introduction
© 2016
DIC is anThe Authors.
optical methodPublished by Elsevier
for full-field, B.V.
non-contact 2D and 3D measurement of deformation and strain on the surface
DIC
of is an optical
Peer-review
components [1]method
under for full-field,
.responsibility non-contact
of theisScientific
The application based the2D
onCommitteeand
of 3D
PCFmeasurement
correlation two imagesofacquired
2016.
of deformation and strain
at different on thestates,
loading surface
at
of components
least one before [1]deformation
. The application is basedafter.
and another on theThe
correlation
recordedofimages
two images acquired at
are analysed anddifferent
comparedloading
by astates, at
special
least one before
Keywords: deformation
High Pressure and Creep;
Turbine Blade; another after.
Finite TheMethod;
Element recorded images
3D Model; are analysed and compared by a special
Simulation.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +351-22-9578710.


* Corresponding
E-mail address:author. Tel.: +351-22-9578710.
spourhassan@inegi.up.pt
E-mail address: spourhassan@inegi.up.pt
2452-3216 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review underThe
2452-3216 © 2017 responsibility of theby
Authors. Published Scientific Committee of ICSI 2017.
Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review underauthor.
* Corresponding responsibility
Tel.: +351of218419991.
the Scientific Committee of ICSI 2017.
E-mail address: amd@tecnico.ulisboa.pt

2452-3216 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.


Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of PCF 2016.
2452-3216  2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of ICSI 2017
10.1016/j.prostr.2017.07.198
1356 Sahand Pourhassan et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1355–1362
2 Sahand Pourhassan et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

correlation technique, which allows the determination of the object contour, as well as the surface displacements with
high local resolution. In order to achieve a good correlation, this method uses a speckle pattern applied to the object
surface and tracks the grey value pattern in small neighbourhoods called subsets during deformation. After acquisition,
these images are digitized and stored for analysis. Two subsets are chosen respectively for the reference and deformed
images for correlation. This technique is used for 2D and 3D deformation, strain measurement on components, for
simultaneous detection of longitudinal and transverse strains with any load, such as tensile, compression, bending and
torsion or a combination of different loads [2], [3].

Considering factors like cost efficiency and ease of use when compared to speckle interferometery, or its great
precision when compared to traditional sensing methods, DIC emerges as a robust tool for both indoor and outdoor
applications [4]. The method is able to precisely determine 2D and 3D strain fields and therefore it’s possible to assess
various material behaviors including metals, ceramics and plastics, bio-materials, polymers, rocks, glass, foams, sands,
soils, clay and shape memory alloys.
The fact that no physical sensor is involved in the process makes DIC even more flexible since it enables measuring
almost any type of deformation in time and space, giving access to information about strain gradients and their
variations in time.
Therefore, DIC technique was applied on current work to characterize the material behaviour of 2024-T3 ALCLAD
and 2124-T851 aluminum alloys and to propose and validate modified geometries compatible for different testing
machines at high strain rates. The goal of this work is to reduce the bias that may cause from using totally geometries
when analyzing strain rate dependency of materials using different testing machines and acquisition system.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials and specimen geometries

The mechanical properties of two different metallic materials were studied, 2024-T3 ALCLAD and 2124-T851
aluminium alloys, using 2D and 3D DIC measurement techniques. Apart from the flat and cylindrical standard
geometries defined by ASTM [5], two modified specimen geometries were also included in this work. The designed
flat specimen and its corresponding gripping system, Fig 1 and Fig. 3 , is similar to the one proposed by Ledford et
al. [6] Likewise, cylindrical specimen was adopted to be able to fit into other testing machines, Fig.2.
To confirm the geometries series of static tensile tests (10-3 s-1) were carried out using MTS 810 servo hydraulic testing
system. As can be seen in the figs below, both flat and cylindrical specimen geometries were divided into standard
and non-standard categories.

Fig. 1. (a) Defined by ASTM E 8M – 04 standard (additional 6mm holes in grip section are for alignment purposes) (b) Non-
standard specimen geometry.

Fig. 2. (a) - Defined by ASTM E 8M – 04 standard, (b) Non-standard specimen geometry.


Sahand Pourhassan et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 3
Sahand Pourhassan et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1355–1362 1357

The summary of the experiments are included in Table 1. Both geometries for flat specimens made from 2024-T3
Al were manufactured along the rolling direction. 5 experiments were conducted for each geometry and 2D-DIC
system with a Qioptiq Rodagon 60mm lens and 4MP camera was used to trace the applied speckle patterns on
specimens. While, cylindrical specimens from 2124-T851 Al were all measured using 3D-DIC with the same lenses.
For sharp focus on cylindrical specimens and convenient calibration process, depth of field was slightly increased
using smaller aperture f/8 and exposure time of 12ms during 3D DIC experiments. Besides image correlation, clip-on
extensometer with a gauge length of 50mm was used (only for standard specimens) for confirmation purposes.

Table 1. Summary of experiments


Material Specimen geometry- No. velocity of Displacement
gauge length (mm) experiments crosshead (mm/min) measurement
ASTM Standard (60) 5 3.6 2D-DIC and
Al 2024-T3 extensometer
ALCLAD Non-standard (20) 5 1.2 2D-DIC

ASTM Standard (60) 5 3.6 3D-DIC and


extensometer
Al 2124-T851
Non-standard (20) 5 1.2 3-DIC

2.2. Test setup

Figure below shows the designed gripping system used to test 2024-T3 aluminum alloy. The same gripping system
(without the machine adapter) could also be used in Split Hopkinson Tension Bar (SHTB) setup.

Fig. 3. Designed gripping system used to test non-standard specimens

DIC setup used during experiments are as following:


Camera: 4.1 MPixel at 150Hz
Image sensor: CMOSIS CMV4000 CMOS, 1”, 5.5x5.5μm2
Resolution: 2048×2048 at 150 fps, Partial Image Modes: single or multiple region of interest
Lens: Rodagon 60mm f/4 from Qioptiq with 48 mm extension
Lighting system: Hedler 250 Spotlight

The camera´s image sensor was placed 400mm away from the specimen during 2D-DIC measurements. While in 3D-
DIC, cameras were 600mm away from cylindrical test specimen with stereo angle of 24°. Considering the brightness
1358 Sahand Pourhassan et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1355–1362
4 Sahand Pourhassan et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

of testing environment and number of utilized spot lights, aperture and exposure time were adjusted accordingly.
Image acquisition period was set to 500ms for approximate test duration of 230 and 270 for standard and non-standard
specimens. Using VIC snap software from correlated solutions, area of interest in mounted specimen was adjusted
and brought into sharp focus. Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 illustrates the MTS 8servo hydraulic testing system with 100KN load
cell equipped with 2D and 3D DIC system.

Fig. 4. MTS 810 servo hydraulic testing machine with 2D-DIC setup (a) Standard flat specimen (b) non-standard flat specimen

Fig. 5. MTS 810 servo hydraulic testing system with 3D-DIC setup (a) standard round specimen (b) non-standard specimen
geometry

Table 2. Details for acquired images for correlation


Material Specimen geometry Pixel size Facet size (px) Total no. of
(px/mm) acquired images
(approx.)
ASTM Standard 31.5 21 460
Al 2024-T3
ALCLAD Non-standard 27.8 29 570

ASTM Standard - 33 175


Al 2124-T851 Non-standard - 35 220

3. Results

Post processing the results was performed by VIC-2D and VIC-3D software from correlated solutions. Strain
distribution on gauge length prior to rupture are illustrated for both materials.
Sahand Pourhassan et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1355–1362 1359
Sahand Pourhassan et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 5

Fig.6. Surface strain concentration prior rupture for both specimen geometries with attached virtual extensometer

Fig. 7. DIC strain field on 2124-T851 Al with attached virtual extensometer

The comparison between clip-on extensometer and DIC on standard specimens for 2024-T3 ALCLAD and 2124-
T851 aluminum alloy materials are presented as a typical stress-strain curve. The results are in great agreement as can
be seen in fig. 8, which confirms the output of current optic measurement method on smaller geometries where
conventional extensometers may not be able to fit on gauge length of material.
6
1360 SahandSahand
Pourhassan et al./ Structural
Pourhassan Integrity
et al. / Procedia Procedia
Structural 00 (2017)
Integrity 000–000
5 (2017) 1355–1362

2024-T3 ALCLAD aluminum alloy 2124-T851 Aluminum alloy


500
500
450
450
400
400

Eng. Stress (MPa)


350
Eng. Stress (MPa)

350
300
300
250 DIC-3D
250 DIC-2D
200
200 Clip-on extensometer
150 clip-on extensometer
150
100
100
50
50
0
0
0 0,02 0,04 0,06 0,08 0,1
0 0,05 0,1 0,15 0,2 0,25
Eng. Strain (mm/mm)
Eng. Strain (mm/mm)

(a) (b)

Fig 8. comparison between DIC and clip-on extensometer on (a) 2024-T3 flat standard specimens (b) 2124-T851 cylindrical
standard specimens

Fig.9 (a) - (b) shows the results for the static tensile properties of 2024-T3 ALCLAD aluminum alloy for standard and
non-standard geometries. Acquired average values of yield and tensile strength for 2024-T3 standard specimen are
304MPa and 460MPa, respectively. The average values of calculated strength slightly decreased in non-standard
geometry, 290MPa and 456MPa. On the other hand, ductility was found to be almost the same in both geometries in
2024-T3 ALCLAD aluminum alloy. Likewise, in 2124-T851 aluminum alloy, Fig.9 (c) - (d), acquired strength values
for standard cylindrical geometry were slightly higher than non-standard geometry, while showing similar final strain
values. The static tensile properties of these materials are summarized in the table 3.

500 500
450 450
400 400
350
Eng. Stress (MPa)

350
Eng. Stress (MPa)

300 300
250
250
200
200
150
150
100
100
50
50
0
0 0,05 0,1 0,15 0,2 0,25 0
0 0,05 0,1 0,15 0,2 0,25
Eng. Strain (mm/mm)
Eng. Strain (mm/mm)

(a) (b)
500 500
450 450
400 400
Eng. Stress (MPa)

Eng. Stress (MPa)

350 350
300 300
250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100
50 50
0 0
0 0,02 0,04 0,06 0,08 0,1 0 0,02 0,04 0,06 0,08 0,1
Eng. Strain (mm/mm) Eng. Strain (mm/mm)

(c) (d)

Fig. 9. 2024-T3 ALCLAD Al (a) standard geometry (b) non-standard geometry


2124-T851 Al (c) standard geometry (d) non-standard geometry
Sahand Pourhassan et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 7
Sahand Pourhassan et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1355–1362 1361

Table 3. Mechanical properties of tested materials at 10-3 s-1


Material Specimen geometry Yield Young´s Tensile strength Strain at rupture
Strength modulus (GPa) (MPa) (%)
(MPa)
ASTM Standard 304 68 460 20
Al 2024-T3
ALCLAD non-standard 290 68 456 21

ASTM Standard 393 71 455 9


Al 2124-T851 non-standard 380 71 452 10

500
450
400
Eng. Stress (MPa)

350
300
2024-T3 ALCLAD Al Standard
250
200 2024-T3 ALCLAD Al non-standard
150 2124-T851 Al Standard
100
2124-T851 Al non-standard
50
0
0 0,05 0,1 0,15 0,2 0,25
Eng. Strain (mm/mm)
Fig. 10. The overall comparison in between materials and geometries

4. Conclusion

Mechanical properties of 2024-T3 ALCLAD and 2124-T851 aluminium alloys were determined using 2D and 3D
DIC techniques. Specimen geometries were modified in a way to be compatible with dynamic testing machines, such
as Split Hopkinson Tension Bar (SHTB).
The results from comparing DIC and traditional strain measurement method (clip-on extensometer) demonstrated the
validity of test setup and post processing during image correlation for standard specimens.
Thereafter, relying only on 2D and 3D DIC techniques, geometric effect of the specimens were assessed. In general,
acquired strength and stiffness values on standard and non-standard specimen geometries were in good agreement for
both materials. Also, the measured strain values have been found to agree, as expected.

Acknowledgements

Dr. Moreira acknowledges POPH – QREN-Tipologia 4.2 – Promotion of scientific employment funded by the ESF
and MCTES. Authors gratefully acknowledge the funding of Project NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000022 - SciTech -
Science and Technology for Competitive and Sustainable Industries, cofinanced by Programa Operacional Regional
do Norte (NORTE2020), through Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional (FEDER). The authors also
acknowledge the CleanSky2 project DeMAnD - Dynamic aircraft MAterial property Database, funded under: H2020-
EU.3.4.5.6. - ITD Systems.
1362 Sahand Pourhassan et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1355–1362
8 Sahand Pourhassan et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

References

[1] M. A. Sutton, J. J. Orteu, and H. Schreier, “Image Correlation for Shape, Motion and Deformation Measurements, in Springer handbook of
experimental solid mechanics,” Springer Handb. Exp. solid Mech. ed. by W.N. Sharpe, Springer, N. Y., 2008.
[2] T. C. Chu, W. F. Ranson, and M. A. Sutton, “Applications of digital-image-correlation techniques to experimental mechanics,” Exp. Mech.,
vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 232–244, 1985.
[3] M. Sutton, W. Wolters, W. Peters, W. Ranson, and S. McNeill, “Determination of displacements using an improved digital correlation method,”
Image Vis. Comput., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 133–139, 1983.
[4] B. Pan, K. Qian, H. Xie, and A. Asundi, “Two-dimensional digital image correlation for in-plane displacement and strain measurement: a
reviewPan, B., Qian, K., Xie, H., & Asundi, A. (2009). Two-dimensional digital image correlation for in-plane displacement and strain
measurement: a review. Meas,” Meas. Sci. Technol., vol. 20, no. 6, p. 62001, 2009.
[5] ASTM E8M-04, Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials [Metric] (Withdrawn 2008), ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2008, www.astm.org.
[6] N. Ledford, H. Paul, G. Ganzenmüller, M. May, M. Höfemann, and M. Otto, “Investigations on specimen design and mounting for Split
Hopkinson Tension Bar ( SHTB ) experiments,” vol. 1049, pp. 1–6, 2015.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi