0 Voturi pozitive0 Voturi negative

0 (de) vizualizări8 paginiCharpy V NOtch and Tj

Jun 14, 2019

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

Charpy V NOtch and Tj

© All Rights Reserved

0 (de) vizualizări

Charpy V NOtch and Tj

© All Rights Reserved

- Neuromancer
- Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race
- Fault Lines
- Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us
- The Path Between the Seas: The Creation of the Panama Canal, 1870-1914
- The Wright Brothers
- The Wright Brothers
- The Lean Startup: How Today's Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses
- A Jazzi Zanders Mystery
- Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap...And Others Don't
- The 6th Extinction
- The Great Bridge: The Epic Story of the Building of the Brooklyn Bridge
- The Power of Discipline: 7 Ways it Can Change Your Life
- The Right Stuff
- Zero to One: Notes on Start-ups, or How to Build the Future
- A Short History of Nearly Everything
- Hit Refresh: The Quest to Rediscover Microsoft's Soul and Imagine a Better Future for Everyone
- Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die
- The Innovators: How a Group of Hackers, Geniuses, and Geeks Created the Digital Revolution

Sunteți pe pagina 1din 8

9 Minister of Natural Resources, Canada. 2001. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. and ESIS.

All rights reserved. 325

Materials Technology Laboratory, CANMET

Natural Resources Canada

568 Booth St., Ottawa, Canada K IA 0G1

* e-mail: btyson@nrcan.gc.ca

ABSTRACT

There have been many attempts to correlate CVN with other fracture parameters

such as KIr and J or CTOD. Most of these have been empirical or semi-theoretical,

shedding little light on the fundamental reasons underlying any correlation.

In the present work, the basic definition of the J integral, including correction for

crack growth, has been used to derive relations between the J resistance curve and

Charpy V-notch test parameters. R curves have been measured on a linepipe steel in the

upper shelf region for V-notched and fatigue pre-cracked Charpy samples at quasi-static

and impact loading rates. The effect of notch acuity on the absorbed energy was small,

but the effect of loading rate was found to be large. Comparisons of these results are

made with earlier experiments on linepipe steels.

crack growth

INTRODUCTION

There have been many attempts in the past to correlate Charpy absorbed energy

with more "fundamental" fracture toughness parameters such as K or J. The reasons for

this are evident: the Charpy test has been used more than any other to characterize the

resistance of materials to fracture, but the results (Charpy absorbed energy, or CVN) are

not directly useful for calculating the critical load that a structure can withstand before

fracture. For the latter purpose, fracture mechanics assessment is required for which the

material parameters required are K or J. In many cases, the only information available is

the CVN. Also, the Charpy test will continue to be used routinely at least for quality

control. For all of these reasons, it would be desirable to be able to estimate the fracture

toughness from CVN.

primarily differences in loading rate and in notch sharpness. These two factors make

correlations problematic in the case of brittle fracture (cleavage). Cleavage fracture is

326 W.R. TYSON, S. XU ANI) R. BOUCIIARD

well known to be very sensitive to constraint (e.g. notch sharpness) and strain rate, and so

these effects must be taken into account in the process of correlation. A technique that is

often used to account for strain rate effects is to shift the transition curve along the

temperature axis, but accounting for notch sharpness effects is more difficult.

If fracture occurs by ductile processes, the onset of crack growth is much less

sensitive to constraint and temperature than is the case for cleavage. Hence, if correlation

between toughness and CVN is possible, it would be more likely to be found for ductile

than for brittle fracture - in particular, in the upper shelf for structural steels. Empirical

correlations for the upper shelf have been reported previously; Leis and Brust [1]

suggested a linear relation between CVN and J02 in the upper shelf, and Mak and Tyson

[2] found a similar relation for linepipe steels, llowever, it is only recently that a

theoretical framework that would explain these results has been sought. One notable

approach to the problem has been reported by Schindler [3], in which it was proposed

that the resistance (R) curve could be evaluated from the Charpy test as

with J in N/mm and CVN in Joules, where Aa is the crack extension and Agt is the

uniform strain at maximum load in a uniaxial tensile test. This approach seems to be

promising in that it agrees quite well with experimental data for linepipe steels.

The present work was initiated to examine in detail the fracture mechanics

description of the Charpy test. In particular, it was intended to take account of crack

growth in deriving a correlation between toughness and CVN. Also, since the

information available from instrumented impact testing is normally limited to the energy

absorbed at maximum load Em and the total absorbed energy CVN, a relation between

these parameters and the resistance curve was sought.

methods, such as standardized in ASTM E 1820 [4]. E 1820 contains two definitions for

the J-integral, termed here a "simple J" measured by a basic test method and a

"deformation J" measured by a resistance curve test method. The latter takes account of

crack growth and results in a J value that depends only on the load and the amount of

crack growth, as described in detail by Anderson [5]. We will assume in the following

derivation that J may be written as a power-law relation

J = Jo(ga) p (2)

The "simple J" is defined by

J - nA~. (3)

Bb0

where Apl is the plastic work, B is the sample thickness, and b0 is the ligament size. For

deeply-notched bend specimens, 1"1=2. A smaller value of r I is appropriate for shallow

cracks (a/W<0.28). For a Charpy specimen a/W=0.2 and r1=1.54, but after only 0.8 mm

Correlation Between J and CVN in Upper Shelf 327

of crack growth the appropriate value of 1"1is 2.0 and it was found adequate in the present

work to use rl=2 from the start of loading. At complete fracture we may use eqns. (2) and

(3) to find Jf (the J value at fracture) by inserting ApI=CVN and Aaf(=8.0 mm). Similarly,

at maximum load we find Jm (the J value at maximum load) by inserting Apt=Em at Aam.

Em Aam]

Then, taking the ratio Jf/Jm we have

This equation may be solved for p provided Aam is known; then J0 may be found from

eqn. (3) using appropriate values of the variables at fracture or at maximum load.

Derivation of a relation for the "deformation J" is somewhat more complicated, but

straightforward. The procedure outlined by Anderson may be followed, after some steps,

to give the general relation for the value of J at a "final" state

final

rl IdApl

,n,,,~ (5)

J fin~ = _( p- 1

b ~ - p - ~ AafinaJ

Again, this equation may be evaluated at fracture and at maximum load to give values of

J at Aaf and Aam. Taking the ratio of these values to eliminate J and rearranging, we find

P+I+(1-P) bo j q g~ - Aam]

Eqn. (6) may be used to solve for p by iteration when CVN, Era, Aaf (=8 mm) and Aam are

known.

Evidently, to solve eqns. (4) and (6) it is necessary to know the amount of crack growth

at maximum load Aa~. In the present work, the "key curve" method was used to estimate

Aam and compared with values from elastic compliance unloading (possible only for

quasi-static loading). In the key curve method, described by Ernst et al. [6], the load P is

related to the plastic load-line displacement Ap by

!

p

b2/W- k (7)

where b is the ligament size, k is a material constant, and n is the work hardening

coefficient. In the present work, n was found from the stress-strain curve. The value of k

was obtained by fitting eqn. (7) to the experimental load-displacement data during initial

loading (from yield to half way to maximum load) when it could be safely assumed that

there would be no crack growth and b=b0=constant. It follows from eqn. (7) that at

constant Ao we have p/b2=paa=o/bo2 and it follows directly that

Aa = b o 1- (8)

328 W.R. TYSON, S. XU AND R. BOUCHARD

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

Tests were done using samples of standard Charpy geometry under quasi-static

and impact loading. The effect of notch acuity was assessed by using standard V-notched

and fatigue pre-cracked (a/W=0.2) samples. For quasi-static loading, the crack length

was estimated using elastic unloading compliance (modified for short cracks [7]) to

compare with the key curve method. Simple and deformation J-integrals were found

using the standard equations in E 1820 (modified for short cracks following Sumpter [8]

and Ernst et al. [9]).

The material used was an X-52 grade linepipe steel with yield and ultimate tensile

strengths of 376 and 510 MPa respectively and work hardening coefficient n=0.129 (all

in the transverse direction). The 20 J transition temperature of standard transverse

through-thickness-notched (C-L) Charpy specimens was found to be -47~ and the

upper shelf started near room temperature. To enable comparison with previous work,

notches and cracks for samples used in the present work were made parallel to the

surface, i.e. samples were of C-R type (surface-notched transverse specimens). For ease

of identification, samples were coded as P (pre-cracked), V (V-notched), S (tested at slow

quasi-static rate), and F (tested at fast impact rate).

RESULTS

Quasi-static tests were performed following the procedures of E 1820 with the

modifications noted above. Crack lengths were measured by CMOD compliance

unloading with the clip gage seated in integral knife-edges and by the key-curve method.

The compliance data is compared with physical measurements in Table I. The

experimental data and key curve for sample V S1 are shown in Fig.l, and the crack

extension measurements by the two methods are compared in Fig.2. Results of the tests

are reported in Tables 2 and 3. The value of the energy at maximum load E,, is the total

value uncorrected for elastic energy; the elastic component is approximately 4% of Em for

the slow tests and about 7% for the impact tests.

ao (mm) ar(mm)

Sample Notch

Compliance Physical Compliance Physical

PSI 1.82 1.69 7.91 8.74

Pre-cracked

PS2* 2.01 1.81 2.57 2.36

V-notched

VS2 2.37 2.01 7.95 8.81

*Unloaded at maximum load

Correlation Between J and CVN in Upper Shelf 329

14000

9 9149149 eee 9

12000 - - 1 1 hne

10000 o**: o

9 Key-curve fitting E estimation 9 1 4 9, . "

~5

~" 8000

-J 8000

83

4000

~2

2000

61 Ar

11'

0 I 2 3 4 5 8 2 4 6

Plastic LLD (mm) Crack extension by complisnce method ( r a m )

Sample

Avg. Avg. Compliance Key curve Physical

PSI 32.4 32.4 10.9 10.7 0.34 0.25

PS2 10.4 0.47 032 0.55

VS1 34.2 32.1 10.6 11.1 0.10 009

VS2 29.9 11.6 0.23 016

Sample

Av~. Avg. Key curve

PFI 59 18.2 0.91

59.5 20.5

PF2 60 22.7 0.84

VF1 65 23.3 0.45

65.5 23.3

VF2 66 23.3 0.31

R curves were found using the standard equations given in E 1820, with crack

length estimated by unloading compliance for the quasi-static tests and by the key-curve

method for the impact tests. Results (plotted as points) for the simple J are shown in

Fig.3, and for the deformation J (which takes crack growth into account) in Fig.4.

Included is an R curve for a deep-cracked sample tested in slow bending (Figs.3 and 4)

and another calculated from Schindler's eqn. (1) (Fig.4). R curves were calculated using

the equations developed in the introduction which require information only on Etot, Era,

and Aam for both quasi-static and impact tests, and are plotted in Figs. 3 and 4 as dashed

lines.

330 W.R. TYSON, S. XU AND R. BOUCHARD

2000

& PF 1 data

9 PS 1 data

1800 o VF1 data 0 o o o

o

9 VS2 data O

Deep cracked slow bend o

- - - Pre-cracked slow bend 0 & &

1600

I IV-notched slow rate 0 & &

I . Pre-cracked impact & ~

9- - - V-notched ompact 0 & ~ ~

1400 S c h i n d l e r e q n ( V F 1)

'r & ~ ~ ~

A o o

.~ 1200

"~ 1 0 0 0 0

"cT 800 ,I

0 -- h / "" "' - " l & l Am&& &&

600

o/ / ~" ......:.i-':i

"__~--~--_--_-- - - --------'---. . . . .

/ /

~. ~C.'- -" ""

400 /'o ,fw"

200

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Crack extension (mm)

1400

PSl data

9

A

PF 1 d a t a

9

VS2 data

o

VF 1 data

1200 Deep cracked slow bend o

Ipre-cracked slow bend A O

- - - V-notched slow bend I A s 9

9,--- - P r e . c r a c k e d i m p a c t A O . S "

m . V-notched 0mpact A ~ ~

~

1000 0 A

~

~ 0

0 & ~ ~ ~ A 0 0

... o ~ O0

._. 800

~j

~ 600

400 I! ,'" .

I I -'o

~

9

9

.... =.-'=""

..,_.___.-.-. ..... --~- ',ji"~--', .....

I,.I 9 . ,.A,,.. - -,,,~ ~,,," ~ , , ; ~ -

200 9 "

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Crack extension (mm)

Correlation Between J and CVN in Upper Shelf 331

DISCUSSION

curve, using Charpy-size specimens? The "measurement capacity" of a fracture

toughness specimen is Jmax=b0Gy/Mwhere M~20 for ductile tearing [4]. For the present

material, for quasi-static loading where Gy=376 MPa, the maximum capacity is---94

kJ/m 2. This means in effect that only the very early parts of the R curves in Figs.3 and 4

are "valid" in the sense of being size-independent. This does not mean that these results

are useless, only that they must be interpreted with caution and that they apply to the

material of the same dimensions as the Charpy specimen.

The equations proposed in this paper for estimating the R curve are reasonable for

the "simple J" (Fig.3). However, they cannot describe the shape of the "deformation J"

curves. The reason for this is obvious: the actual R curves in Fig.4 pass through a

maximum and do not have the assumed form of eqn. (2). This is doubtless a result of the

limited size of the Charpy specimen and the resulting loss of constraint when the crack

extends beyond a few mm; indeed, most standards restrict the measurement of J to the

region Aa<b0/4 (e.g. [4]). In order to account for the actual shape of the R curve, a more

complex equation than eqn. (2) would have to be used. For this reason, the "simple J" is

a more useful quantity.

Comparison of the measured curves in Fig.3 with Schindler's equation [3] shows

that the latter yields a curve of the correct order, but to obtain better agreement it would

be necessary to account for rate effects. Schindler's approach implies that the impact

CVN can be used with tensile properties to deduce quasi-static R curves in the upper

shelf, but the work reported here shows that there is a significant effect of loading rate.

Similarly, comparison with the deep-cracked slow-bend results for the same

material shows that the Charpy samples with a/W=0.2 are much higher. This is

consistent with other results in the literature reporting a strong effect of a/W on R curves,

reflecting a loss of constraint and resulting increase in toughness for shallow-notched

specimens [7].

The results in Fig.3 show that the effect of notch acuity is not large, but that there

is a marked effect of loading rate on the tearing resistance. Tables 2 and 3 show that there

is a large difference in absorbed energy between quasi-static and impact rates.

The extent of crack growth at maximum load varies over quite a large range, and

is significantly smaller for V-notched than for fatigue pre-cracked samples. The values

of Aam seem to be somewhat larger for impact than for slow loading, but this may reflect

inaccuracies of the key-curve method. The method relies on curve-fitting in the early

part of the load-displacement curve, and because of oscillations in the measured load in

the impact test it is difficult to smooth the curve objectively. With this proviso, it may be

concluded that the amount of crack growth at maximum load for the steel investigated in

this work varies between 0.1 and 0.9 mm, with a typical value of 0.3 mm for quasi-static

loading and 0.6 mm for impact loading.

332 W.R. TYSON, S. XU AND R. BOUCHARD

Finally, these results can be compared with data on linepipe steels pre-cracked to

a/W=0.5. For the "simple J", at quasi-static rate we have for a Charpy sample (assuming

that the material studied here gives typical data) E~CVN/2, Aaron0.3 mm, and Em/Ef'z-_-l/3.

Then eqns. (2) to (4) give p=0.33 and Jo_=6.2CVN (with Aa in mm). Allowing for a

lowering of the R curve by a factor of two to account approximately for constraint

effects, we have J~3.1CVN(Aa) ~ Then at Aa=0.2 mm, J02___-I.8CVN. This compares

favourably with the experimental result for a number of linepipe steels J0 2=2.2CVN [2].

CONCLUSIONS

I. The "simple J" results were adequately estimated by simple equations requiring

measurement only of the total absorbed energy, energy at maximum load, and crack

extension at maximum load.

2. The extent of crack growth was measured using a simple version of the "key curve"

method, but owing to difficulties in smoothing the instrumented impact load-

displacement data, the accuracy of the results at small amounts of growth was limited.

3. The effect of notch acuity on the absorbed energy was small, but the effect of loading

rate was large.

REFERENCES

Leis, B.N. and Brust, F.W. (1990), "Ductile Fracture Properties of Selected Line-

Pipe Steels", Amer. Gas Assoc., NG-18 Report No. 183.

Mak, D.K. and Tyson, W.R. (1998), "Material Assessment of Canadian SAW

Line-Pipes", Proc. Int. Pipeline Conf., ASME, Calgary, Vol. II, pp. 711-721.

Schindler, H.J. (1998), Proc. 12th European Conference on Fracture (ECF 12),

EMAS, Sheffield, pp. 841-846.

ASTM Annual Book of Standards (1997), "Standard Test Method for

Measurement of Fracture Toughness", ASTM E 1820 - 96, Vol. 03.01, ASTM,

Philadelphia, PA, pp. 992-1024.

Anderson, T.L. (1995), Fracture Mechanics. Fundamentals and Applications,

Second Edition, CRC Press, Boca Raton, N.Y., pp. 418-421.

Emst, H.A., Paris, P.C., Rossow, M. and Hutchinson, J.W. (1979), in Fracture

Mechanics. Eleventh Conference, ASTM STP 677, Smith, C.W. (Ed.), ASTM,

Philadelphia, pp. 581-599.

Joyce, J.A. (1992), in Fracture Mechanics. Twenty-Second Symposium, ASTM

STP 1131, Emst, H.A., Saxena, A. and McDowell, D.L. (Eds.), ASTM,

Philadelphia, Vol. I, pp. 904-924.

Sumpter, J.D.G. (1987), Fat. Frac. Eng. Mater. Struct 10, pp. 479-493.

Emst, H., Paris, P.C. and Landes, J.D. (1981), in Fracture Mechanics: Thirteenth

Symposium, ASTM STP 743, Roberts, R. (Ed.), ASTM, Philadelphia, pp. 476-

502.

- A 089049Încărcat dePrasanth Virat
- IPC2012-90448Încărcat deMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- Xiao&Karihaloo(2002)Încărcat deElizabeth Santiago
- Effects of Test Temperature and Grain Size on the Charpy Impact Toughness and Dynamic Toughness (KID) of Polycrystalline NiobiumÎncărcat dekelsiu1
- ASME 20- 20Fatigue 20for 20EngineersÎncărcat deMadhulika Srinivas
- MATERIAL SCIENCEÎncărcat denijju2009
- LSYFCGÎncărcat deAnthoni Raj
- Încărcat dexuantienht
- 2009 AC CrackÎncărcat debloomdido
- Thesis Final CopyÎncărcat deSaad Al Hely
- Article Failure mechanismÎncărcat deEliasTalaAllca
- 19750013598_1975013598Încărcat deelgheryb_choukri
- StrengthÎncărcat dedotaman
- Course Structure Syllabus M.tech CADCAMÎncărcat denagsanthosh3
- Fracture 1Încărcat deseenulegend
- A Fracture Mechanics Approach for Analyzing Spiral Weld Pipes Containing CracksÎncărcat dealadinsane
- Mode-II Fatigue Fracture of Wood-Composite BondedÎncărcat deideepuj
- Huang PublicationsÎncărcat deG Mahendra
- chapter8.pptÎncărcat deBolaji Suberu
- 61.IJMPERDAUG201961Încărcat deTJPRC Publications
- 8th_isiemsÎncărcat defoush basha
- 02-r4Încărcat dejeanpremier
- INSDAG presentation on Fatigue in Steel StructureÎncărcat deNIBEDITA DEY
- Ada 399377Încărcat deavenasha
- E569. Standard Practice for Acoustic Emission Monitoring of Structures During Controlled StimulationÎncărcat deVíctor Jiménez
- DEM Simulations of Soil Creep Due to Particle CrushingÎncărcat dekrainajacka
- 2000_07_July_Recent dev. Anchor bolts.pdfÎncărcat deMaruthappan Sundaram
- Fretting-initiated fatigue in large bore engines connecting rodsÎncărcat desunita45
- ThesisÎncărcat deCatalin Pruncu
- SyllabusÎncărcat deMayankJain

- Evaluation of Antifungal Effect of Silver Nanoparticles Against Microsporum Canis, Trichophyton Mentagrophytes and Microsporum GypseumÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Stellite corrosionÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Thermal ShockÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- HAZ liquation cracking in austenitic and duplex s.s. - J.C. Lippold.pdfÎncărcat deIulian Marius Costache
- Comportamiento de la corrosion en medio marino.pdfÎncărcat deArnulfo Zetina Villarreal
- CrackArrestonBrittleFilm.pdfÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- An Extension of the Eindhoven Classification Model to The Educational Sector.pdfÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Failure AnalysisÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- A method for root cause analysis with a Bayesian belief network and fuzzy cognitive map.pdfÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- CohesiveModelApplicationpredictingResidualStrengthlargescaleFuselageStruct-16-2009.pdfÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- EmbritSteamTurbineRotor 1 s2.0Încărcat deAndrea Caldera
- BriquetingRollerMachine 1 s2.0Încărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Thermal FatigueÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Analysis of Failure of Axle Housing of Crane Truck With Fracture Mechanics 1995Încărcat deRiza Khan
- Synthesis, Characterization and Antifungal Activity of Chemically and Fungal‐Produced Silver NanoparticlesÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Antifungal Effects of SilverParticles AntifungalÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Ductile Brittle transitionÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Correlation Be Tj and Cv nÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- DetermDuctCrackInitMagnetCharpyModifiedÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Current Status of Small Specimen Technology in Charpy Impact TestingÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- CorrelationsbtCharpyTandCrackInitJintegralconceptsÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- CorrelatbetImpactResistandToughnessDuplexSSÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Char Pyt and Local Appo Rach to FractureÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Analysis Data Impact t and ChtÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- A prospective clinical trial comparing Biobrane® Dressilk® and PolyMem® dressings on partial-thickness skin graft donor sitesÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Failure of Carbon Steel Tubes in a Fluidized Bed CombustorÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- CreepRemainingLifeofHydrogenReformerOuletPigTailsAF-15-2008Încărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Degradation Behavior of Epoxy Lining Material Under Corrosive ConditionsÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera
- Criteria for Weld Ability of SteelsÎncărcat deAndrea Caldera

- Wire Rope Sling Capacity ChartsÎncărcat deRiko Bin Zulkifli
- Lecture 5_Brittle Failure-compressionÎncărcat deAdriana Cf
- 2141908Încărcat deapi-278652209
- A Comparative Study on Failure Pressure Estimations of Unflawed Cylindrical VesselsÎncărcat deBrighton John
- Ian_Gilbert_R._Design_of_Prestressed_Con.pdfÎncărcat deKhac Hoang Pham
- Metal Strength and Stiffness_ What’s the DifferenceÎncărcat deNagaraj Muniyandi
- Microsoft Word - LAB-01Încărcat deapache2
- Victrex Properties-guide en MetricÎncărcat demlombardiTO
- p751_ch2 NEHRP Recommended Provisions: Design ExamplesÎncărcat deSmr Only
- Remaining Life Assessment of RefineryÎncărcat deCostynha
- Implant Materials - Unalloyed TitaniumÎncărcat deSebastian De Ossa Restrepo
- ReportÎncărcat deShamsur Rahman Russell
- Exp 7Încărcat deJad Antonios Jelwan
- Som Lab ManualÎncărcat deSyed Fahad Ali
- UNIT-1 Structural Analysis-1 220716Încărcat deAzrin Yusop
- Induced StressesÎncărcat deDennis Mickael de Leon
- INTRODUCTIONÎncărcat dejohn devon
- Formulas for Computing the Stresses in Center-wound Rolls.Încărcat deEduardo Salomao
- Mech of Materials - Lab 1Încărcat deshihabsultan
- ASTM D6272.docÎncărcat debeni firiya
- 140133 2.Pdf3rd DiplomaÎncărcat depinky
- Electro.pdfÎncărcat demauricio PEREZ
- Analytical Model for the Effective Strain in FRP-wrapped Circular RC ColumnsÎncărcat dedxzaber
- Strain EnergyÎncărcat deBabu Subramaniam
- Swelling TestÎncărcat dewoimonyet
- Background to Design Rules_Issue 2 (3)Încărcat deIsabel López Tresgallo
- AU 3-8 Sem 090710 (BOS 2010)Încărcat dePraveen Singh Rathore
- 2PAV20110039Încărcat deJorge Henrique
- 02mainÎncărcat deiSoK11
- Constitutive Modeling and Material BehaviorÎncărcat deAnonymous hprsT3WlP

## Mult mai mult decât documente.

Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.

Anulați oricând.