Question

. A stainless steel part is given to you that failed under static loads at elevated temperatures greater than half the melting temperature in air. A young engineer claims after examining the part using SEM that it did not fail by grain boundary cavitation because there were no dimples anywhere on the fracture surface. He then claims that the failure was the result of a processing error. However, it is not clear how long the fracture surface oxidized at elevated temperatures after the failure occurred. How would you check the validity of the engineer's claim?

Answer 1

Accerding to my opnièn il is nota procesing Tt is happenin £1太rnalojám Exceed thei. Strength, it Cause intrnal shrumes in-the tlements and based en the ceueloped ood sheneth Here the tainlsel miv gd shngki and aA well as ,Tod dulilky Porottes、 /9 at in above observed youtuu is annu Scanned with CamScanner

IS OcCuru breaking Inhs atmic Atoms tvalid Band break 12) High shar at tes ecting on Britle riaxial strew t thoug h Sem rache graphicxaminatan pno t cleaning rs ray alphul and is uscua Cleani nq1S rare and l5 Usua skdAfǐ cleaning tん psie EDS analyi CS Scanned with CamScanner

finall i Gnclude忖the observed tuhouts IS cwud d bo bond brakage during the proces and t is idantihied based en the Elevatd mpatos t 1S I der tん.jeluu occrad Scanned with CamScanner