Sunteți pe pagina 1din 8

From Charpy to Present Impact Testing

D. Franqois and A. Pineau (Eds.)

9 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. and ESIS. All rights reserved 173




*Department of Production Systems Engineering, Toyohashi University of Technology,

**Graduate School of Toyohashi University of Technology, Toyohashi University of
1-1, ttibarigaoka, Tempaku-cho, Toyohashi-shi, Aichi, 441-8580, Japan


The standard Charpy V-notch specimen has received a great deal of attention as small,
inexpensive and convenient material test specimen which provides deep insights of inherent
fracture toughness problems. In this study, Charpy impact tests are performed utilizing the
Computer-Aided Instrumented Charpy impact test (CAI) method which has been developed by
one of the present authors (TK) for nearly 40 years. The well-known Server's equation is used
to t;stimatc tensile properties directly from the Charpy tests. Agreement between the prediction
and experiments arc checked for major practical aluminum alloys heat-treated to respective
standard heat treatment states. Discrepancy between them is almost negligible in the case of
age-hardening alloys, while it amounts sometimes several ten % in the solution hardening
allc~ys. Especially in the case of age-hardening alloys, which is considered important as
primary structural materials, feasibility of utilizing the Charpy tests to obtain tensile properties
over a wide strain range is clarified by being based on the thermally activated deformation
process of the aluminum alloys.


Instrumented Charpy impact test, Commercial aluminum alloys, Impact tensile test, three point
bend test, Server's equation


It is a pressing need that properties of light metals should be measured and evaluated under
dynamic loading conditions, because they have began to be used widely for the civil
engineering and constructions and transportations. The three point bend properties under the
moderate dynamic loading condition have been extensively measured by the Charpy impact
testing machine. Due to its simple and convenient nature, the Charpy impact test method [1,2]
has been used widely for screening of materials. Recently, the instrumented Charpy impact test
machine has been established by Japanese Industrial Standards committee (JIS) [3] and
therefore the usefulness of the instrumented Charpy impact test is being recognized more and
174 T. KOBA YAStll. II. TODA A N D 7". M A S U D A

more even in Japan. On the other hand, since various impact test machines such the
split-Hopkinson bar apparatus, the servo hydraulic impact testing machine and etc. have been
developed owing to the above-mentioned social demands, dynamic mechanical properties
became to be measured at high strain rate in well-equipped laboratories. However, those test
machines are large, more expensive than Charpy impact test machines and also needs special
skills and knowledge to obtain accurate values.
More than 20 years ago, W. L. Server [4] proposed the simple equation which correlated yield
stress values of a nuclear pressure vessel steel obtained in the Charpy V-notch three point bend
tests with those from conventional tensile test data on the basis of the slip-line fields solution
for general yielding. Thereafter, one of the present authors (TK) revealed the possibility of such
correlation between the Charpy V-notch tests and the tensile tests even in some practical
aluminum cast alloy [5]. In this study, the tensile stresses and the three point bend loads on five
kinds of commercial aluminum alloys are measured under impact loading conditions in order
to clarify relationships between the tensile and three point bend properties.


The materials used for this study are four widely used wrought aluminum alloys and a cast
aluminum alloy which were heat-treated to respective ordinary heat treatment conditions.
Chcmical compositions of used samples are shown in Table 1. Geometry and nominal
dimensions of specimens are given in Fig.1 [5]. Specimens both for Charpy V-notch and
impact tensile tests are sampled in longitudinal orientation.

Table 1 Chemical compositions of samples used. (mass%)

Si Fe .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . . .
Ti . . . .
Li . . . .
. . . .

A2()91-T8 0.03 0.06 2.00 - 1.50 - - - 2.10 ().12 bal.

A5()83-ttl 12 1).14 0.20 0.03 0.65 4.64 0.ll - 0.02 - - bal.

A6()61-T6 0.73 0.20 0.25 0.11 1.(X) 0.05 0.06 0.02 - - bal.
A7()75-'I'6 1). 12 0.20 1.60 0.06 2.40 0.19 5.80 0.02 - - bal.
AC4CH-T6 6.76 0.07 - - 0.36 - - (). 13 - - bal.

Strain gage
t~:().25 l (f~ strain measurement) ~.1 t--]

45 ~ A L, --.lJ
Strain gages
~ ~ ~~R~15
(for load measurement) (mm)

(a) Three point bend specimen (b) Tensile specimen

Fig.1. Geometry of specimens used.

Analysis of Test Data Obtained from Charpy V and Impact Tensile Test 175

The instrumented Charpy impact test was performed on a pendulum Charpy impact machine
having a capacity of 490 J at room temperature. Fig. 2 shows a diagram of the CAI (Computer
Aided Instrumented Charpy impact testing) system used in this study. The initial loading
vclocity was 5m/s. Load was picked up from semi-conductor strain gages attached on a
hammer tap. Origin, development, calibration and accuracy of the system are reported
somewhere clsc in this volume [6,7].
Thc impact tensile tests were conducted using a servo-hydraulic impact test machine with a
capacity of 49kN. Fig. 3 shows the schematic diagram of the impact tensile test system. In

_t-., tJummy ing - - - - ~ A m p . ~ l " ' B ~ - . - ~ Personal
G ca tuigv~e ;/ a- ,u.g- ,e I3 C~]~cun~ [ Computer

1 9 Various Values of Parameters
9 Various Diagrams

Circuit Deflection


Fig.2. Schematic diagram of the CAI testing system.


Amp. Digital storage Personal
Load cell ~
oscilloscope computer

Fig.3. Schematic diagram of the instrumented impact tensile test system.


order to record the true load-time and strain-time history avoiding the effects of oscillation
accompanying with inertial impact loading, two strain gages were attached onto specimen
surface of the parallel body shown in Fig. l(b) to measure load directly. The loading velocity
was varied from 0.01 to 12m/s. These data obtained from a load-deflection curve and
stress-strain curve were compared as a function of strain rate.
The instrumented Charpy impact specimen and impact tensile specimen are different in their
shape and fracture mode. However, Server, W. L. [4] proposed that impact tensile properties
can be correlated through a simple equation by applying a slip line fields solution for general
.. 6K,,W d (1)
24.4(W - a ) 2
where ,r is strain rate, K,, is elastic stress concentration factor, W is specimen width, a is
V-notch depth and d" is deflection rate. In this case, K,, =4.28 [8]. Later, Green, A. P. and
Hundy, B. B. [9] performed the analysis of plane strain bending of V-notched specimens.
Assuming a Tresca yield criterion, the relationship between three point bending moments, PW,
at general yield is given by:
o = (2)
B(W - a ) 2
where B is specimen breadth and a=2.99 [4]. P is load value obtained the instrumented Charpy
impact test.


Figure 4 shows stress-strain curves of four popular wrought aluminum alloys and a cast
aluminum alloy at two different strain rates. In all of the cases, Young's modulus is almost
constant at all strain rates. 0.2% proof stress slightly increases with increasing strain rate, but
this dependence is not similar, because negative strain rate dependency is reported in solution
hardening aluminum alloys [10]. All of the stress-strain curves at various strain rates are
rcplotted as 0.2% proof stress vs. logarithm of the strain rate as shown in Fig. 5. As for the
0.2% proof stress, the strain rate sensitivity appears to increase at higher strain rates. However,
there is no considerable rate sensitivity up to the intermediate strain rate of 102 s 1.

600 /

s 400
[ 10"s"

300l lO's:

---~. S '1
300 ~ 200
,7, 2 oo
1 O0

()It 1 1 I 0 1 I 1 I
0 1 2 2 0 1 2 3 4
Strain, `5 (%) Strain, ,5 (%)

(a) A209 I-T8 (b) A5083-H 112

Analysis of Test Data Obtainedfrom Charpy V and Impact Tensile Test 177

400 80C

300 LZ / 70C i 0.2%

10~s ''


~lO~ ' 500

~10~ '
~ 2 oo 400
I O0 2OO
I O0
0 l
0 1 2 4 0 1 2
Strain, ,E (%)
Strain, ,E (%)
(c) A606 l-T6 (d) A7075-T6
500 ~ -

300 I 0.2% I O's'

Fig.4. Typical stress-strain curves at

20() ~ / \ 10Os,, loading velocity of 0.01 and 12m/s in
five kinds of popular aluminum alloys.
II/ 0.2% off-set line is drawn in each
0 1 2 3 4
Strain, ~ (%)
(e) AC4CH-T6

9 A2(~:) I-T8

0 O0
El A5083-H112
6ix) 0 O0
lk A606I-T6
O A7075-T6
400 9 AC4CH-T6

"d 2(X)
~ ,...,

0 1 1 I
-4 -2 0 2 4
10 10 10 10 10
Strain rate, e/s"

Fig.5. Variation of 0.2% proof stress with nominal strain rate.


15 8

11 0
() 1 2 3 4 5 0 3 6 9 12 15
Deflection, D / mm Deflection, D / mm

(a) A209 l-T8 (b) AS083-H 112

8 15

6 m

z 10

q O
~' 5

0 0 ~ l i
() 5 10 0 1 2 3 4
l)eflection, D / mm Deflection, D / mm

(c) A6061-T6 (d) A7075-T6


"~" p Fig. 6. Typical load-deflection curves
4 recorded in the instrumented Charpy
impact tests carried out at 5m/s in five
kinds of widely used wrought and cast
2 aluminum alloys. Yield and m a x i m u m
load, Py and P,,,, and initial elastic line
are indicated in each figure.
() 1 1
() 1 3
2 4
Deflection, D / mm

(e) A C 4 C H - T 6
Analysis of Test Data Obtained from Charpy V and Impact Tensile Test 179

El Charpy
1 Tensile

~, 4()()


.~ 200

A2091 -T8 A6061 -T6 AC4CH-T6

A5083-H 112 A7075-T6

,~ 80()
1"-! Charpy
-- II Tensile

~. 401)

2 (1(1

~ 1)
A2091 -T8 A61161 -T6 AC4CH-T6
A51183-H 112 A7075-T6

l-ig.7. Comparisons of strength obtained by impact tensile tests and 3-point bend tests.

Figure 6 shows typical load-deflection curves in the instrumented Charpy impact tests, where
P,. is defined as a point from which a stress-strain curve deviates from the initial linear line. Fig.
7 shows comparisons of yield stresses and ultimate tensile strengths calculated by equation (2).
Yield stress, s 0.2, and ultimate tensile strength, s,t.,, shown in Fig. 6 were calculated by equation
(2) from I~. and P,n, respectively. Strain rates of three point bend tests calculated by equation
(1) were between 61)0 and 71)0 s~,which are relatively close to those of the impact tensile tests
when the tensile loading velocity was 7m/s. The data obtained provided the evidence that
Charpy V-notch yield stresses could be used to determine dynamic tensile yield stress values
Ior the widely used aluminum alloys. In an age hardening aluminum alloys having low solute
atoms concentration such as A61)61 and AC4CH-T6, the agreement seems to be fairly good,
while difference in the solution hardening aluminum alloys reached more than 30% especially
for ultimate tensile strengths. Since the work hardening coefficient of the materials is not taken

into consideration in the Server's equation, the strength calculated from the three point bend
load was relatively underestimated for the solution hardening aluminum alloy. In addition, once
its agrecment is confirmed by such a comparison, strain rate dependency of each material like
Fig. 5 can be utilized to estimate tensile properties at various strain rates from quasi-static to
impact such as strain rate of about 10 3s~. This is because strain rate sensitivity of widely used
aluminum alloys is relatively moderate and it can be evaluated by analyzing thermally
activated deformation process. This is especially true for the age-hardening aluminum alloys
likc A6()61-T6 in which the agreement in Fig. 7 was fairly good.


Computer-aided instrumented Charpy impact testing system, which has been developed and
accuracy of which has been pursued by one of the authors (TK), was utilized to obtain yield
and maximum loads in the V-notch Charpy bend tests. Also servo-hydraulic impact testing
system was used to obtain tensile stress-strain relationships over a wide strain rate range with
special care on accurate load measurement. Strain rates estimated for the Charpy V-notch
specimen tested at 5m/s almost corresponded to those for the impact tensile tests at 7m/s.
Relatively good agreement between the prediction by the Server's equation and experiment was
obtained especially for age-hardening alloys, while solution hardening alloy showed
discrepancy up to 30% in the later stage of strain hardening such as ultimate tensile strength.
Since the agreement was fairly good, it is possible to estimate the tensile properties over a wide
strain rate range up to 103 s ~ by performing ordinary Charpy V-notch impact test together with
the analysis of the thermal activation process of the practical aluminum alloys.


[ 1] T. Kobayashi, I. Yamamoto, J. Jpn. Inst. Met. 32 (1993) 151-159.

[2] T. Kobayashi, J. Jpn. Inst. Met. 12 (1973) 546-556.
[3] Japanese Industrial Standards Committee. (1993) JIS B 7755-1993
[4] W. L. Server, J. Eng. Mat. Tech. 100 (1978) 183-188.
[5] N. Sugiura, T. Kobayashi, I. Yamamoto, S. Nishido, K. Hayashi, J. Jpn. Inst. Light Met. 45
(1995) 638-642.
[6] T. Kobayashi, Proc. CCC2(X)I (2001) in press.
[7] S. Morita, M. Otani, T. Kobayashi, Proc. CCC2001 (2(X)l) in press.
[8] Rau, C. A., Jr. PhD Thesis, Stanford University, U. S. A. 1967.
[9] A. P. Green, B. B. Hundy, J. Mech. Phys. Solids. 4 (1956) 128-144.
[1()] T. Mukai, K. Higashi, S. Tanimura, Met. Sci. Eng. A176 (1994) 181-189.