🔥🔥 Don’t Miss Out on Our End of Autumn Sale. If you have any questions, feel free to click the bottom right corner to contact our customer service..

Concat us[email protected]
Shopping Cart

No products in the cart.

🔍
ASTM-C1239:2005 Edition

ASTM-C1239:2005 Edition

$44.96

C1239-00(2005) Standard Practice for Reporting Uniaxial Strength Data and Estimating Weibull Distribution Parameters for Advanced Ceramics

Published By Publication Date Number of Pages
ASTM 2005 19
PDF Format Searchable Printable Preview Now
Guaranteed Safe Checkout
Categories: ,

If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to our online customer service team by clicking on the bottom right corner. We’re here to assist you 24/7.
Email:[email protected]

1.1 This practice covers the evaluation and subsequent reporting of uniaxial strength data and the estimation of probability distribution parameters for advanced ceramics that fail in a brittle fashion. The failure strength of advanced ceramics is treated as a continuous random variable. Typically, a number of test specimens with well-defined geometry are failed under well-defined isothermal loading conditions. The load at which each specimen fails is recorded. The resulting failure stresses are used to obtain parameter estimates associated with the underlying population distribution. This practice is restricted to the assumption that the distribution underlying the failure strengths is the two-parameter Weibull distribution with size scaling. Furthermore, this practice is restricted to test specimens (tensile, flexural, pressurized ring, etc.) that are primarily subjected to uniaxial stress states. Section 8 outlines methods to correct for bias errors in the estimated Weibull parameters and to calculate confidence bounds on those estimates from data sets where all failures originate from a single flaw population (that is, a single failure mode). In samples where failures originate from multiple independent flaw populations (for example, competing failure modes), the methods outlined in Section 8 for bias correction and confidence bounds are not applicable.

1.2 Measurements of the strength at failure are taken for one of two reasons: either for a comparison of the relative quality of two materials, or the prediction of the probability of failure (or, alternatively, the fracture strength) for a structure of interest. This practice will permit estimates of the distribution parameters that are needed for either. In addition, this practice encourages the integration of mechanical property data and fractographic analysis.

1.3 This practice includes the following:

1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard.

PDF Catalog

PDF Pages PDF Title
1 Scope
Referenced Documents
Terminology
4 Summary of Practice
Significance and Use
Outlying Observations
Maximum Likelihood Parameter Estimators for Competing Flaw Distributions
5 FIG. 1
6 FIG. 2
7 Unbiasing Factors and Confidence Bounds
8 FIG. 3
9 Fractography
FIG. 4
TABLE 1
TABLE 2
10 Examples
TABLE 3
TABLE 4
FIG. 5
11 TABLE 5
12 Keywords
13 X1. COMPUTER ALGORITHM MAXL
X1.1
X1.2
X1.3
X1.4
FIG. X1.1
14 FIG. X1.2
15 FIG. X1.2
16 X2. TEST SPECIMENS WITH UNIDENTIFIED FRACTURE ORIGINS
X2.1
FIG. X1.2
17 X2.2
18 REFERENCES

Related products

ASTM-C1239
$44.96