DEF - STAN - 02-874 Testing Route For The Assessment of New Submarine Hull Steels

Ministry of Defence
Defence Standard 02-874

Issue 2 Publication Date 12 October 2012
Testing Route for the Assessment of

New Submarine Hull Steels
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Category 2
Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

Provided by IHS Markit under license with MODUK Sold to:TQCMS LTD [244776100001] - VRAKAST@GMAIL.COM,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale,2019-06-20 13:45:12 UTC
Def Stan 02-874 Issue 2
Contents
Foreword ...........................................................................................................................................................v
1 Scope ..................................................................................................................................................1
2 Warning ..............................................................................................................................................1
3 Normative References.......................................................................................................................1
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
4 Terms and Definitions.......................................................................................................................2

5 Abbreviations.....................................................................................................................................2
6 General Requirements ......................................................................................................................3
7 Decision to Proceed ..........................................................................................................................6
8 Acceptance Standards......................................................................................................................6
9 Materials, Manufacturing Processes and Test Methods ...............................................................8
Annex A Initial Assessment ............................................................................................................................9
A.1 Information Pack ...............................................................................................................................9
A.2 Chemical composition and weldability .........................................................................................10
A.3 Microstructure and magnetisation ................................................................................................10
A.4 Composition and corrosion susceptibility ...................................................................................10
Annex B Preliminary Mechanical Tests........................................................................................................12
B.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................12
B.2 Test Coupons ..................................................................................................................................12
B.3 Tensile strength...............................................................................................................................12
B.4 Charpy impact .................................................................................................................................12
B.5 Hardness measurements ...............................................................................................................13
B.6 Performance criteria .......................................................................................................................13
Annex C Weldability .......................................................................................................................................14
C.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................14
C.2 Controlled thermal severity (CTS) test..........................................................................................14
C.3 Y – Groove or Tekken test..............................................................................................................14
C.4 NRL weldability test ........................................................................................................................15
C.5 Performance criteria .......................................................................................................................15
C.6 Reporting .........................................................................................................................................16
Annex D Magnetic Signature.........................................................................................................................19
D.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................19
D.2 Permeameter system ......................................................................................................................19
D.3 Stress magnetisation ......................................................................................................................19
D.4 Reporting .........................................................................................................................................20
ii
Annex E Fracture ............................................................................................................................................21

E.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................21
E.2 Testing strategy and performance criteria - back ground ..........................................................21
E.3 Recommended test parameters and acceptance criteria ...........................................................22
E.4 Flawed Bulge Explosion (FBE) Test..............................................................................................23
E.5 Hull Toughness Element (HTE) Test .............................................................................................23
E.6 High rate dynamic fracture mechanics (CTOD) test....................................................................24
Annex F Fatigue..............................................................................................................................................25
F.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................25
F.2 Fatigue Tests ...................................................................................................................................25
Annex G Stress Corrosion Cracking ............................................................................................................28
G.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................28
G.2 Slow strain rate SCC test ...............................................................................................................28
G.3 Constant load cantilever beam SCC test......................................................................................30
G.4 Performance criteria .......................................................................................................................30
G.5 Reporting .........................................................................................................................................30
Annex H Corrosion Fatigue ...........................................................................................................................32
H.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................32
H.2 CF Test Procedure ..........................................................................................................................32
H.3 Performance Criteria.......................................................................................................................32
Annex I Bauschinger Effect...........................................................................................................................34
I.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................34
I.2 Bauschinger Test Procedure .........................................................................................................34
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Annex J Fabrication Trials.............................................................................................................................36
Figures
Figure 1 – Testing route for the assessment of new submarine hull steels ..............................................4
Figure 2 – Supplied plate dimensions and position of extraction of coupons for assessment
tests (coupons A,B,C,D for tensile and Charpy survey, Annex B) ............................................7
Figure A.1 – Graville's diagram for weldability assessment of high strength steels ..............................11
Figure C.1 – Controlled thermal severity test assembly and procedure ..................................................16
Figure C.2 – Schematic representation of the Y-Groove test specimen...................................................17
Figure C.3 – Schematic illustration of NRL specimen ................................................................................18
Figure D.1 – Schematic illustration of permeameter apparatus ................................................................20
Figure F.1 – Crack growth rate versus stress intensity range plot for tests performed in air ...............26
Figure F.2 – Position of extraction of, SENB and CT specimens from Kprep welds for the
assessment of fatigue behaviour of weldments ........................................................................27
Figure G.1 – Slow strain rate SCC specimen...............................................................................................29
Figure G.2 – Experimental arrangement for slow strain rate tests under free or controlled
corrosion potential........................................................................................................................29

iii
Figure G.3 – Constant load cantilever beam SCC test arrangement ........................................................31
Figure H.1 – Crack growth rate versus stress intensity range plot for Q1(N) tests performed in
seawater and reference line for tests in air ................................................................................33
Figure I.1 – Specimen geometry for Bauschinger effect tests...................................................................35
Figure I.2 – Stress strain plot during Bauschinger effect tests to determine reduction of 0.2%
proof in compression after yield in tension. ..............................................................................35
Tables
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Table 1 – Test procedure overview - PLATE..................................................................................................5
Table 2 – Test procedure overview – WELDS, FORGINGS, CASTINGS......................................................6
Table A.1 – Magnetic Properties of Steel’s Microstructural Phases .........................................................10
Table E.1 – Recommended test parameters for FBE / HTE testing...........................................................23
Table E.2 – Recommended parameters for high rate CTOD testing .........................................................23
Table F.1 – Paris Law Equation Constants For A Range Of High Strength Steels ..................................26
Table H.1 – Paris’ Law Equation Constants for a Range of High Strength Steels Tested in
Seawater at the Free Corrosion Potential...................................................................................32
iv
Foreword
AMENDMENT RECORD
Amd No Date Text Affected Signature and Date
REVISION NOTE
This standard is raised to Issue 2 to update its content.
HISTORICAL RECORD
This standard supersedes the following:
Def Stan 02-874 Issue 1 17 August 2004
Sponsorship
1. This Defence Standard (Def Stan) is sponsored by the DESNAG-MT, Naval Authority Group, Defence
Equipment and Support, Ministry of Defence (MOD).
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
2. The complete Def Stan Issue comprises:
Testing Route for the Assessment of New Submarine Hull Steels
3. If it is found to be unsuitable for any particular requirement the MOD is to be informed in writing of the
circumstances.
4. Any user of this Defence Standard either within MOD or in industry may propose an amendment to it.
Proposals for amendments that are not directly applicable to a particular contract are to be made to the
publishing authority identified on rear cover, and those directly applicable to a particular contract are to be
dealt with using contract procedures.
5. No alteration is to be made to this Defence Standard except by the issue of an authorised amendment.
6. Unless otherwise stated, reference in this Defence Standard to approval, approved, authorised or similar
terms, means the Ministry of Defence in writing.
7. Any significant amendments that may be made to this Defence Standard at a later date will be indicated
by a vertical sideline. Deletions will be indicated by 000 appearing at the end of the line interval.
8. Extracts from British Standards within this Defence Standard have been included with the permission of
the British Standards Institution.
Conditions of Release
General
9. This Defence Standard has been devised solely for the use of the MOD, and its contractors in the
execution of contracts for the MOD. To the extent permitted by law, the Crown hereby excludes all liability
whatsoever and howsoever arising (including but without limitation, liability resulting from negligence) for any
loss or damage however caused when the Defence Standard is used for any other purpose.

v
10. This document is Crown Copyright and the information herein may be subject to Crown or third party
rights. It is not to be released, reproduced or published without written permission of the MOD.
11. The Crown reserves the right to amend or modify the contents of this Defence Standard without
consulting or informing any holder.
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
MOD Tender or Contract Process
12. This Defence Standard is the property of the Crown. Unless otherwise authorised in writing by the MOD
must be returned on completion of the contract or submission of the tender in connection with which it is
issued.
13. When this Defence Standard is used in connection with a MOD tender or contract, the user is to ensure
that he is in possession of the appropriate version of each document, including related documents, relevant
to each particular tender or contract. Enquiries in this connection may be made of the Authority named in
the tender or contract.
14. When Defence Standards are incorporated into contracts, users are responsible for their correct
application and for complying with contractual and other statutory requirements. Compliance with a Defence
Standard does not of itself confer immunity from legal obligations.
Categories of Naval Defence Standard
15. The Category of this Naval Defence Standard has been determined using the following criteria:
a) Category 1. If not applied may have a Critical affect on the following:

Safety of the vessel, its complement or third parties.
Operational performance of the vessel, its systems or equipment.
b) Category 2. If not applied may have a Significant affect on the following:

Safety of the vessel, its complement or third parties.
Operational performance of the vessel, its systems or equipment.
Through life costs and support.
c) Category 3. If not applied may have a Minor affect on the following:

MOD best practice and fleet commonality.
Corporate experience and knowledge.
Current support practice.
Related Documents
16. In the tender and procurement processes the related documents in Section 3 can be obtained as
follows:
a) British Standards British Standards Institution,

389 Chiswick High Road,
London, W4 4AL
b) Defence Standards Defence Equipment and Support

UK Defence Standardization,
Kentigern House
65 Brown Street,
Glasgow, G2 8EX
c) Other documents Tender or Contract Sponsor to advise.
17. All applications to Ministry Establishments for related documents are to quote the relevant MOD
Invitation to Tender or Contract Number and date, together with the sponsoring Directorate and the Tender
or Contract Sponsor.
vi
18. Prime Contractors are responsible for supplying their subcontractors with relevant documentation,
including specifications, standards and drawings.
Health and Safety
Warning
19. This Defence Standard may call for the use of processes, substances and procedures that may be
injurious to health if adequate precautions are not taken. It refers only too technical suitability and in no way
absolves either the supplier or any user from statutory obligations relating to health and safety at any stage
of manufacture or use. Where attention is drawn to hazards, those quoted may not necessarily be
exhaustive.
20. This Defence Standard has been written and is to be used taking into account the policy stipulated in
JSP430: MOD Ship Safety Management System Handbook.
Additional Information
(There is no relevant information)
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

vii
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Blank page
Copyright British Defence Standards

viii Order Number: W2166361
Testing Route for the Assessment of New Submarine Hull

Steels
1 Scope
1.1 This standard has been prepared to provide the UK MOD with detailed guidelines of the tests required,
and order by which they should be carried out, for the assessment of structural steels for submarine hull
construction.
2 Warning
The Ministry of Defence (MOD), like its contractors, is subject to both United Kingdom and European laws
regarding Health and Safety at Work. Many Defence Standards set out processes and procedures that could
be injurious to health if adequate precautions are not taken. Adherence to those processes and procedures
in no way absolves users from complying with legal requirements relating to Health and Safety at Work.
3 Normative References
3.1 The publications shown below are referred to in the text of this standard. Publications are grouped and
listed in alpha-numeric order.
ASTM STP 665 Stress Corrosion Cracking: The Slow Strain-Rate Technique
BS EN ISO 3690 Welding and allied processes – Determination of hydrogen content in arc weld metal
BS EN ISO 6892-1 Metallic materials - Tensile testing - Part1: Method of test at ambient temperature
BS EN ISO 7539-7 Corrosion of metals and alloys – Stress corrosion testing – Part 7: Method for slow
strain rate testing
BS EN ISO 17642-2 Destructive tests on welds in metallic materials – Cold cracking tests for weldments –
Arc welding processes – Part 2: Self-restraint tests
BS ISO 12108 Metallic materials – Fatigue testing – Fatigue crack growth method
BS 7448-1 Fracture Mechanics Toughness Tests - Part 1: Method for Determination of KIc,
Critical CTOD and Critical J Values of Metallic Materials
BS 7910 Guide to methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures
JIS Z 3158 Method of Y-Groove weld cracking test – Japanese Standards Association
JSP430 MOD Ship Safety Management System Handbook
3.2 Reference in this Standard to any normative references means in any Invitation to Tender or contract
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
the edition and all amendments current at the date of such tender or contract unless a specific edition is
indicated.
3.3 In consideration of clause 3.2 above, users shall be fully aware of the issue and amendment status of all
normative references, particularly when forming part of an Invitation to Tender or contract. Responsibility for
the correct application of standards rests with users.

1
3.4 DStan can advise regarding where normative references documents are obtained from. Requests for
such information can be made to the DStan Helpdesk. How to contact the helpdesk is shown on the outside
rear cover of Def Stans.
4 Terms and Definitions
4.1
Supplier
The organisation producing and supplying steel plates.
4.2
Purchaser
The organisation procuring the steel plates.
4.3
Independent test house
The organisation employed by the supplier to make independent checks on the properties of the plate.
4.4
Design Authority
The approved firm, MOD establishment or branch responsible for the detailed design of material to approved
specifications and authorised to sign a certificate of design or certify sealed drawings.
4.5
Approval authority
The organisation that has the overall responsibility for approving new submarine hull steels. For safety
reasons, this authority lies with the Ministry of Defence department responsible for naval materials (currently
Naval authority Group, Materials Technology (NAG-MT ) DE&S, Abbey Wood South, Bristol, BS34 8JH)
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
5 Abbreviations
ACPD Alternating current potential drop
ASTM - STP American Society for Testing of Materials – Standard Technical Publication
BS British Standard
CEV Carbon equivalent value
CF Corrosion Fatigue
CGR Crack growth rate
CCT Centre-cracked tension (specimen)
COTS Commercial off the shelf
CT Compact tension (specimen)
CTOD Crack tip opening displacement
CTS Controlled Thermal Severity
DCPC Direct current potential drop
FBE Flawed bulge explosion
HAZ Heat Affected Zone
HTE Hull toughness element
NRL Naval Research Laboratory
SENB Single edge notched bend (specimen)
SCC Stress Corrosion Cracking
TL Transverse – Long (notch orientation)
TS Transverse – Short (notch orientation)

2 Order Number: W2166361
6 General Requirements
a) A steel selected for submarine pressure hull use must satisfy very stringent property criteria since the
structure is:
⎯ a military structure, which must withstand explosive loading as well as the natural forces of the sea;
⎯ operating below the surface in a seawater environment (although exposed surfaces are protected
by paint coatings of reasonably high integrity and acoustic damping tiles, these may be subject to
degradation and damage);
⎯ required to withstand the hydrostatic pressure;
⎯ manned;
⎯ mobile and subject to complex cyclic and dynamic loading.
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
b) Strength properties must be met in both tension and compression and in all thicknesses of parent plate
material, and at the welded joints. Very good fracture toughness is required to ensure adequate defect
tolerance under static and dynamic loading conditions. The material should be readily available at
reasonable cost and capable of fabrication into the final structure, by construction processes similar to
those already in use in shipbuilding, with minimal loss of properties. Furthermore, the material should
possess stealth properties (low magnetic signature) and be corrosion resistant.
c) The preferred material for submarine construction over the past 20 years has been the quenched and
tempered steel Q1(N). The specified mechanical properties for Q1(N) are as follows:
0.2% Proof strength: Parent plate >550 MPa
Weldments >550 MPa
Charpy energy: Parent plate 80J at -80°C
Weldments 50J at -50°C
d) The above values are the current design specifications for Q1(N) and may not necessarily be the same
for a new steel. If the proposed steel does not meet the above criteria, prior consultations should be held
with the Design Authority before proceeding with the evaluation programme.
e) If the continuous casting process is to be used in the manufacturing route then a sufficient reduction ratio
should be agreed with the Design Authority/Approval Authority.
f) An overview of the evaluation programme is presented in the flow chart in Figure 1, which describes the
required tests and the order they should be conducted. The order of execution of the required tests has
been designed to provide the most cost effective and rapid assessment route, by identifying at an early
stage the "critical" properties that are most likely to lead to the rejection of the material.
g) More information on the required tests and associated performance criteria is also given in a test
programme overview in Tables 1 and 2.
h) The tables have been split into plate (Table 1), and welds, forgings and castings (Table 2) for clarity with
respect to types of test involved and performance criteria.
i) The order of carrying out tests is given in Figure 1. Fracture, fatigue, and corrosion testing of plate and
weldments is to proceed concurrently. Forgings and castings are to be evaluated only after the
fabrication trial is complete.
j) Annex A details the procedure for a decision making process on whether an evaluation programme for a
new steel proposed for submarine hull construction should be initiated. It describes the extent of
technical information to be provided by the supplier and the scientific basis on which the initial
assessment will be based.
k) Annexes B - I describe in detail the tests required for the fitness for purpose assessment of a new steel,
and have been arranged in the same order as the test procedure shown in the flowchart in Figure 1.

3
Proposed submarine hull steel
INITIAL ASSESSMENT
Suppliers info pack
YES readily Weldable ? NO
low magnetic signature?
Assess fabrication
costs relative to
Preliminary mechanical material price
LOW
tests
Assess cost of
demagnetization HIGH
WELDABILITY
COTS consumables ? NO Consumable development costs HIGH
LOW
CTS test (BS EN ISO 17642-2)
YES Y-GROOVE test (JIS Z 3158) Fabrication costs
(or NRL test)
LOW
MAGNETISATION
Low magnetic signature under both

YES NO
static and dynamic loading ?
FRACTURE TOUGHNESS - PLATE & WELDS REJECT
FBE, HTE,
PASS FAIL
CTOD (BS 7448)
FATIGUE - PLATE & WELDS
Fatigue CGR determination (BS ISO 12108)

Low CGRs High CGRs
Criterion: CGRs comparable to Q1(N)
ENVIRONMENT SENSITIVE CRACKING - PLATE & WELDS
non susceptible SCC tests susceptible
CF tests High CGRs
Route approval
BAUSCHINGER EFFECT FABRICATION TRIAL plate, castings, forgings
OTHER PROPERTIES
Figure 1 – Testing route for the assessment of new submarine hull steels
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
4
Table 1 – Test procedure overview - PLATE
Test
Assessment test Method
order
Mechanical Tensile test (BS EN ISO 6892-1)
1 (see NOTE 1)
properties (Annex B) Charpy impact tests
CTS test (BS EN ISO 17642-2)
Weldability
2 Y-Groove or Tekken test (JIS Z 3158) (see NOTE 2)
(Annex C)
NRL test
Magnetic signature
3 Permeameter tests (see NOTE 3)
(Annex D)
Fracture toughness
4 High rate CTOD test (see NOTE 4)
(Annex E)
Fatigue CGR
5 (BS ISO 12108) (see NOTE 5)
(Annex F)
Stress corrosion Slow strain rate SCC test
6 cracking (BS EN ISO 7539-7) (see NOTE 6)
(Annex G) SEN cantilever beam constant load SCC test
CT or SENB specimen
Corrosion Fatigue
7 Test frequency 0.001Hz (see NOTE 7)
(Annex H)
(BS ISO 12108)
Bauschinger effect
8 Modified Haigh specimen – QinetiQ method
(Annex I)
NOTE 1 Tensile strength >550MPa, Charpy impact >80J at –80°C. (These values are for guidance only. They
are derived from current experience with Q1(N) steel and could be overridden at the discretion of the Design
Authority)
NOTE 2 Performance criterion: No cracking observed.
NOTE 3 Performance criterion: Magnetic properties better or comparable to Q1(N).
NOTE 4 Performance criteria and test options please refer to Annex E.
NOTE 5 Performance criterion: CGR ≤ CGR for Q1(N) (see also remark in Note 1).
NOTE 6 Performance criterion: Minimal sensitivity or immunity to SCC.
NOTE 7 Performance criterion: CGR comparable to Q1(N) steel.
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

5
Table 2 – Test procedure overview – WELDS, FORGINGS, CASTINGS
Test
Assessment test Method
order
Mechanical Tensile test (BS EN ISO 6892-1)
1 (see NOTE 1)
properties Charpy impact test
Fracture toughness
2 FBE or HTE test (see NOTE 2)
(Annex E)
Fatigue CGR
3 SEN cantilever beam fatigue test (BS ISO 12108) (see NOTE 3)
(Annex F)
Stress corrosion
Slow strain rate SCC test,
4 cracking (see NOTE 4)
SEN cantilever beam constant load SCC test
(Annex G)
CT or SENB specimen
Corrosion Fatigue
5 Test frequency 0.001Hz (see NOTE 5)
(Annex H)
(BS ISO 12108)
6 Fabrication trials
NOTE 1 Tensile strength >550MPa, Charpy impact >100J at -20°C (castings)

> 50J at -50°C (welds)
(These values are derived from current experience with Q1(N) steel and could be overridden at the
discretion of the Design Authority)
NOTE 2 Performance criteria and test options please refer to Annex E.
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
NOTE 3 Performance criterion: CGR ≤ CGR for Q1(N) steel welds.

NOTE 4 Performance criterion: Minimal sensitivity or immunity to SCC.
NOTE 5 Performance criterion: CGR ≤ observed CGR for Q1(N) steel welds.
7 Decision to Proceed
a) When all parties have scrutinised the supplier’s data (Annex A) and agreed it to be of interest,
arrangements will be made for evaluation of the steel by an independent test house (or test houses).
b) The purchaser will request the independent test house(s) to draw up a detailed project plan and
timescales. Once these have been agreed, the purchaser (with Design and Approval authorities
clearance) is to ask the supplier to proceed with the independent test house phase of the trial.
c) On receipt of the go-ahead from the purchaser, the supplier is to provide three plates (one from the start
of the production run, one from the end and one from in-between). The plate thickness should be the
maximum standard thickness for which approval is sought. The supplier is to extract and label test
blanks in accordance with Figure 2, and send these to the independent test house(s).
d) Figure 2 applies to any slab irrespective of production route.
8 Acceptance Standards
a) The independent test house(s) will produce reports for the tests described in this standard, and copies
will be sent to the purchaser, the supplier, and the Design Authority.
6
b) Finally, a complete set of documents to be forwarded for Approval. The Approval Authority, subject to full
satisfaction of the requirements, will prepare a final letter granting the approval status for the submarine
hull steel to be used in Royal Navy submarines.
c) It is a requirement of the contract with the independent test house(s) that the reports should not merely
be a collection of test certificates, but should collate and summarise the data to highlight trends in
properties with position in the plate or with specimen orientation.
d) Particular attention is to be paid to whether any aspect of plate performance fails to meet the
performance criteria as specified in this document.
e) Where appropriate, further information on reporting is also given after the individual test descriptions in
the following Annexes.
2.5m
A B
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Rolling
direction
CTOD
specimens
FBE or HTE FBE or HTE

specimens specimens
5m
C
Fatigue Bauschinger
specimens specimens
CF
specimens
SCC
specimens
D
Figure 2 – Supplied plate dimensions and position of extraction of coupons for
assessment tests (coupons A,B,C,D for tensile and Charpy survey, Annex B)

7
9 Materials, Manufacturing Processes and Test Methods

a) Since the experience with fabrication cracking in QT35 pressure hull steel in the 1960s, there has been a
cautious attitude to the introduction of new submarine pressure hull materials. Over the past 30 years
the UK MOD has initiated investigations of several steels which have been proposed for submarine
construction. All of these have been rejected at some stage for failure to satisfy one or more
performance criteria.
b) Since the early 1970s the quenched and tempered Q1(N) steel (0.2%PS: 550 MPa) has been the
preferred material for submarine construction in the UK. Q2(N) steel (0.2%PS: 690 MPa) has also been
approved but not used in practice. Q1(N) and Q2(N) steels are close copies of the US pressure hull
steels HY80 and HY100 respectively, which has consequently reduced the risk involved in their
selection. Nevertheless, both these materials have been subjected to very lengthy and expensive test
programmes before approval.
c) Experience has shown that it is unlikely that a new proposed steel will meet all of the specified
performance requirements. A balanced judgement will therefore have to be made on its approval. For
example, Q1(N) is not readily weldable and is not paramagnetic. On the other hand, it possesses other
superior mechanical properties (mainly outstanding fracture toughness), which have made it the
preferred material for submarine hull construction. If the new proposed steel has significant advantages
over Q1(N), for instance the ability to be welded without preheat, it may be possible to accept other
properties such as toughness and fatigue crack growth which are slightly less favourable than those
specified in this standard. This should be discussed fully with the Design Authority when the relevant
data are available.
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
8
Annex A
Initial Assessment
A.1 Information Pack

a) A new steel proposed for submarine hull construction shall be provided by the supplier with an
information pack, which demonstrates that the manufacturer’s facilities are capable of producing
material of high and consistent quality. The supplier's information pack will be used for an assessment of
the suitability of the steel for submarine hull construction. The information pack might be expected to
contain the following:
⎯ name, address and brief history of works,

⎯ types of plate and steel grades currently in production,
⎯ largest (thickest) plate which can be made,
⎯ estimated total annual production of finished plates,
⎯ experience of personnel relevant to the production of high quality steel plate,
⎯ details of steelmaking processes including number and individual capacity of steelmaking units,
⎯ description of rolling mill, including width and diameter of rolls,
⎯ details of any special equipment used in steelmaking,
⎯ details of raw materials used in steelmaking,
⎯ system to be employed for control of chemical composition,
⎯ full details of heat treatments used (if any).
b) Information should also be provided detailing material properties as follows:
⎯ longitudinal, transverse and through thickness tensile properties,

⎯ longitudinal and transverse Charpy over a transition as opposed to just one temperature,
⎯ detailed chemical composition of proposed steel and composition limits to be used,
⎯ details of microstructure,
⎯ information on the uniformity of properties throughout the plate.
⎯ any other relevant test data (for instance weldability, fracture toughness, fatigue, or stress
corrosion).
c) The purchaser will appoint an external knowledgeable body to examine the supplier's data and carry out
an initial assessment of the suitability of the proposed steel based on, corporate experience and
information from the international scientific literature.
d) The chemical composition and microstructural characteristics of the steel, as reported by the supplier,
will give a guide on the expected behaviour with respect to weldability, magnetisation and corrosion
susceptibility.
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

9
A.2 Chemical composition and weldability

a) An indication of the degree of weldability of a steel can be given by the %carbon content and the carbon
equivalent value (CEV). This is assessed through Graville’s diagram (plot of %C content versus CEV,
Figure A.1).
⎛ % Mn + % Si ⎞ ⎛ % Ni + %Cu ⎞ ⎛ %Cr + % Mo + %V ⎞
CEV = %C + ⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟
⎝ 6 ⎠ ⎝ 15 ⎠ ⎝ 5 ⎠
b) The plot shows three zones, namely; easily weldable, weldable, and difficult to weld (requiring pre-heat).
A number of known steels are shown on the diagram.
c) An estimate of the minimum preheat temperature required can also be made from the chemical
composition of the steel, through the relationship:
T = 213 ⋅ (C.E.) − 26.5
where
Mn Si Ni Cr Mo V
C.E. = C + + + + + +
6 24 40 5 4 15
A.3 Microstructure and magnetisation

a) Magnetisation will be assessed by examination of the microstructural characteristics of the steel. This will
mainly involve the identification of the percentage of ferromagnetic phases present. Magnet properties
of steel’s microstructural phases are summarized in Table A.1.
b) The magnetic properties of steels are very difficult to assess without experiment. This examination will
provide information for guidance only. Experimental assessment will therefore have to be carried out.
Table A.1 – Magnetic Properties of Steel’s Microstructural Phases
Ferromagnetic Paramagnetic
High magnetic signature Low magnetic signature
Ferrite
Acicular ferrite Austenite
Bainite ε’ − martensite
α’ - martensite
A.4 Composition and corrosion susceptibility

a) There is no conclusive evidence linking microstructure with corrosion susceptibility in steels.
Nevertheless, corrosion susceptibility has been linked with the presence of Cu, Cr, Mo and N. In
addition, it has been found that:
⎯ Bainitic microstructures (such as QT35) exhibit higher corrosion fatigue crack growth rates than
martensitic microstructures (such as Q1(N), Q2(N)).
⎯
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Cu containing steels exhibit higher corrosion fatigue crack growth rates than quenched and
tempered (Ni, Cr) steels.
10
b) The corrosion assessment will be based on past experiences with similar steels and published
information in the international scientific literature. As with magnetisation response, the assessment will
only provide information on the likelihood of susceptibility, which will have to be verified by experiment.
0.4
0.35 ZONE 2
WELDABLE
0.3 ZONE 3
DIFFICULT TO WELD
Carbon Content (%)
0.25
0.2 UXW HY 100
QT 35
QT 28
0.15 Q1N
HY 80
BIS 812 EMA
RQT701 HY 130
0.1
Shoralshim500 NSS550
ZONE 1 HSLA80 HSLA100
0.05 EASILY WELDABLE
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Carbon Equivalent Value (%)
Figure A.1 – Graville's diagram for weldability assessment of high strength steels
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-

11
Annex B
Preliminary Mechanical Tests
B.1 Introduction
a) This Annex describes the tests required to provide comprehensive information on basic mechanical
properties (tensile strength, Charpy energy, and hardness); and on the variation of these properties
throughout a given plate and from plate to plate in the same production run.
b) If the steel under consideration has been under production for a long time, and the supplier is able to
provide this information from trustworthy archive sources, it may be possible (with Design Authority
agreement) to waive the tests in this annex and proceed directly to the main test programme.
B.2 Test Coupons

a) The supplier shall provide four coupons from each of the three plates identified in Clause 7c. Each
coupon will measure 300x300mm. The position for extraction will be as shown in Figure 2.
b) The supplier is to label the coupons with the appropriate plate number and letter and dispatch then to the
independent test house.
c) The supplier is to prepare a plan showing how these coupons correspond to any specimens extracted for
the supplier’s own production quality control checks.
B.3 Tensile strength

a) The independent test house will extract and test 20 tensile specimens from each plate (four coupons,
five specimens from each coupon) as follows:
Coupons A, B,C & D (Figure 2):

1 longitudinal mid-thickness,
1 longitudinal surface,
1 transverse mid-thickness,
1 transverse surface,
1 through thickness.
b) The tensile tests are to be conducted at room temperature according to BS EN ISO 6892-1.
B.4 Charpy impact

a) The independent test house are to extract 43 Charpy specimens from each plate as follows:
From coupon C (Figure 2):

⎯ 8 longitudinal (LT) Charpy, mid-thickness;
⎯ 8 transverse (TL) Charpy, mid-thickness;
From each of coupons A, B and D (Figure 2):

⎯ 3 transverse (TL) Charpy, surface 1;
⎯ 3 transverse (TL) Charpy, mid-thickness;
⎯ 3 transverse (TL) Charpy, surface 2.
12 --`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

b) The sets of 8 Charpy specimens are to be tested as a transition, at temperatures of: -150°C, -125°C,
-100°C, three at -80°C, -50°C, +20°C.
c) The sets of 3 Charpy specimens are all to be tested at –80°C.
B.5 Hardness measurements

One through thickness hardness survey is to be carried out at each of the coupon locations A,B,C, and D
form each of the three plates (total of twelve surveys).
B.6 Performance criteria

a) The criteria which Q1(N) steel is expected to meet on the above tests for route approval are:
⎯ The energy of all Charpy tests at –80°C shall exceed 80 Joules.
⎯ The yield strength of all tensile tests shall exceed 550 MPa.
b) It may not be necessary to fully meet the above criteria for a new submarine steel, but any deviations
from the above should be discussed with the Design Authority before proceeding to the main test
programme.
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

13
Annex C
Weldability
C.1 Introduction
a) This annex describes the required tests for a full assessment of the weldability (i.e. the production of
defect free high integrity weldments) of a proposed steel for submarine construction.
b) If the proposed steel requires high preheat to avoid fabrication cracking this is likely to rule out its
selection due to high fabrication costs. The aims of the weldability tests are to: a) determine the cracking
susceptibility of the weld metal and HAZ, b) establish the welding operating envelope, and c) identify
consumables. As no one test is capable of evaluating the hot and cold crack susceptibility of both weld
deposit and base plate, two types of test will need to be carried out:
⎯ the Controlled Thermal Severity test (CTS) for base plate crack susceptibility;
⎯ the Y-Groove or Tekken test for weld deposit crack susceptibility.
c) An alternative to the Y-Groove or Tekken test is the NRL test also used to assess weld deposit crack
susceptibility.
d) The decision criterion will be based on preheat requirements, and consequently fabrication costs, for the
production of high integrity weldments.
C.2 Controlled thermal severity (CTS) test

a) The controlled thermal severity test is a single pass fillet weld cracking test which simulates the stress
concentration and degree of restraint inherent in many fillet welds. The effect of thermal severity on the
propensity to cold cracking can be studied by varying the plate thickness and the heat input.
b) The CTS test arrangement with a brief description of the test procedure is given in Figure C.1. This is a
standard test for which the procedure and assessment criteria are described in detail in BS EN ISO
17642-2.
c) Hydrogen diffusivity measurements will also be carried out on the CTS test blocks according to BS EN
ISO 3690.
d) Tests will be carried out on full submarine hull thickness plate (thickness will be specified by the Design
Authority) at 3 heat input ranges (low, medium, high) for each proposed consumable, i.e. total number of
tests = 3 x number of consumables.
C.3 Y – Groove or Tekken test

a) This is also a weld deposit crack susceptibility test and its advantages over the NRL test are that: a)
machining to close tolerances is not critical; and b) there are no restrictions over the thickness of the
plate. The specimen design is shown in Figure C.2.
b) This test is also a standard test for which the procedure and assessment criteria can be found in JIS Z
3158.
c) Tests will be carried out on full submarine hull thickness at 3 heat input ranges (low, medium, high) for
each proposed consumable, i.e. total number of tests = 3 x number of consumables.
14
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

C.4 NRL weldability test

a) The test was developed at the Naval Research Laboratory in the US to determine the “threshold level” of
restraint required for weld deposit cracking with a given combination of weld metal, base plate and
welding process variables.
b) The specimen dimensions are critical for this test and must be controlled to close tolerances. Great care
must be taken to avoid problems such as variable root opening throughout the specimen or the
development of a bending moment perpendicular to the plane of the specimen during the solidification of
the weld arising from inappropriate positioning of the base of the groove.
c) The NRL specimen is a 304.8x203.2x25.4 mm plate with a central groove along the length extending
from the edge to a distance of 254mm, where a 25.4mm diameter hole is drilled. The design of the
specimen is shown in Figure C.3.
Note: Since the specimen dimensions are critical, there is no possibility of testing plate thicknesses other than 25.4mm. If
the Design Authority feels that full thickness plate should be tested then the Y–Groove or Tekken test may be performed.
d) A test weld is deposited along the groove, under the conditions investigated (heat input, consumable
type), commencing at the edge and terminating just short (approx. 6.5mm) of the hole. This arrangement
introduces along the weld length a varying degree of restraint (minimum at the edge and maximum near
the hole).
e) Weld metal cracking starts outwards from the hole and is visible on the specimen surface. Cracks are
detected by magnetic particle inspection or penetrating dies.
f) The crack length is measured to provide the cracking index of the material. The larger the crack the
more susceptible the material.
g) Strain gauges located at the un-grooved end and inside the hole are connected to an x-t recorder to
monitor stress with time, thus providing quantitative values of stress at which cracking occurs.
h) The tensile load distribution along the weld length is given by the equation:
− Px = 2CJe − Jx cos(Cx ) − 2MC 2 e −2 x [cos(Cx ) − sin (Cx )]
where: C=1.565/b,
b, is the distance from the weld centreline to the specimen edge
x, is the distance along the weld from the hole centre
V,M are the separating force and moment respectively, obtained from the strain gauge plots.
i) The maximum tensile force (near the hole) will be given by:
Px = 0 = 2C (V − CM )
j) Knowledge of the tensile stress can provide information on the magnitude of restraint stress that can
result in weld cracking. Two specimens per condition for a full restraint assessment are required.
k) The test represents an actual fabrication problem (varying restraint), therefore, laboratory solutions to
cracking difficulties can be directly applied to field application of a material.
C.5 Performance criteria

The criterion of performance, applicable to all test types (CTS, NRL, Y-Groove), is that no cracking is
observed.
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

15
C.6 Reporting
The independent test house will compile a detailed report in accordance with the requirements laid down in
Clause 8. The report will include details of heat inputs evaluated, consumables assessed and pre-heat
requirements (if any).
Sections for
metallographic Side 2
examination
Side 1 Anchor weld
TEST PROCEDURE
1. ESTABLISH DESIRED PREHEAT TEMPERATURE
2. DEPOSIT SIDE 1 TEST WELD
3. RE-ESTABLISH PREHEAT TEMPERATURE
4. DEPOSIT SIDE 2 TEST WELD
5. HOLD 48 HOURS SECTION IN LOCATIONS SHOWN
6. EXAMINE SECTIONS FOR CRACKING
Figure C.1 – Controlled thermal severity test assembly and procedure
16
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Order Number: W2166361

Constraining
weld Test weld
A B
150
A’ B’
60 80 60
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Section A-A’ Section B-B’
60°
1.0 - 2.0 mm
Figure C.2 – Schematic representation of the Y-Groove test specimen

17
203.2
Strain gauges
Ø25.4
304.8
254
60°
25.4
15.9
1.6
Figure C.3 – Schematic illustration of NRL specimen
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
18
Annex D
Magnetic Signature
D.1 Introduction
a) Stealth is an important requirement for submarine operations and therefore new proposed steels need to
possess a low and constant magnetic signature. This Annex to describes the test procedure for
evaluating the magnetic characteristics of the proposed steel.
b) The requirement for a steel proposed for submarine hull construction is that the application of external
loading (static or dynamic) should have a minimal effect on its magnetisation characteristics.
c) There are no standards governing the magnetic characteristics of steels and therefore the assessment
will be based on comparison of performance with Q1(N) steel.
d) The magnetic properties of steels are characterised in a purpose modified permeameter apparatus.
D.2 Permeameter system

a) An excitation coil is used to supply a magnetic field (H) to the sample, and a search coil, connected to an
electric integrator, measures the magnetic induction (B) of the sample. A Nilomag yoke counters the
demagnetising effect of the samples by providing a flux return path. The basic principle of operation is
shown schematically in Figure D.1.
b) The test specimen used is rod shaped, 10mm diameter and 210mm length, threaded at each end,
machined from the steel plate with the axis taken along the rolling direction.
c) Two specimens will be tested, extracted from 3 different batches of supplied plate (i.e. a total of six
specimens), since small variations in processing can influence the magnetisation characteristics of the
steel.
d) Before commencing the experiment the sample is demagnetised by applying a high positive and then
negative field, and then slowly reducing these alternating fields to almost zero (5% decrease per cycle).
e) A full B-H loop and an initial B-H curve from the demagnetised state are then recorded. The initial
relative permeability is determined from a least squares fit to the low-field region (<100 A/m) of the initial
B-H curve. The magnetic coercivity and remnant magnetic induction are determined from the full B-H
loop.
D.3 Stress magnetisation

a) A small magnetic field is applied to the sample ~500 A/m, which is then loaded in tension up to 200MPa
in 20 MPa intervals, and released back to 0 MPa. The change in magnetisation is measured during this
process and presented as a plot of magnetisation vs applied tensile stress.
b) The procedure is repeated for compressive and cyclic loading.
c) The magnetic data supplied from the initial material characterisation would therefore be:
⎯ BH Loop
⎯ Initial permeability
⎯ Stress-magnetisation performance
19
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

D.4 Reporting
The test report will describe in detail the test procedure and any magnetisation effects observed. In the case
where the material does not comply with the performance criterion specified by the Design Authority an
analysis of the effect of degaussing procedures should be mentioned.
Nilomag yoke
Sample
Ø10 x 200mm
Search Excitation
coil coil
Figure D.1 – Schematic illustration of permeameter apparatus

--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
20
Annex E
Fracture
E.1 Introduction
a) The following specialist tests are available to demonstrate the ability of a submarine hull steel to
withstand dynamic loading in the presence of a fatigue crack:
⎯ Flawed Bulge Explosion (FBE) test;

--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
⎯ Hull Toughness Element (HTE);

⎯ Dynamic fracture mechanics (or CTOD) test following BS7448.
A detailed description of each of the tests is given in Clauses E.4 to E.6.
b) The fracture assessment must identify a testing strategy which offers the best combination of structural
realism and ease of testing. Inevitably this leads to some compromise, and it is necessary to make a
judgement on the best tests to use for any particular assessment. Another variable is the required
performance criterion. This Annex offers suggested guidelines on test selection and performance
criteria, but it may be necessary to adjust these as the particular characteristics of a new steel become
apparent.
c) The fracture assessment must cover all product forms – plate, weld, HAZ, castings, and forgings. It could
be argued that the same performance criteria should apply equally to all product forms. In practice, it will
always be easier to achieve high toughness in parent plate than in the other less carefully processed
forms of the steel. The performance criteria selected for a given product form must not fall below the
minimum fitness-for-purpose requirement, but should also not deviate too far from the best toughness
that can be achieved in that product form with good fabrication practice.
d) Decisions on testing strategy and acceptance criteria should be made jointly with the Design Authority at
appropriate stages in the test programme.
E.2 Testing strategy and performance criteria - background

a) The factors which need to be taken into account in assessing the ability of a submarine hull to
successfully withstand explosive loading without fracture are deformation level, initial crack size, and
strain rate.
b) The FBE and HTE tests are fatigue pre-cracked structural elements subjected to explosive loading. The
explosion severity is selected to induce a strain level corresponding to the submarine design shock
factor. The FBE and HTE tests thus incorporate all required fitness-for-purpose factors implicitly. The
FBE test induces biaxial loading, and is a development of the Pellini bulge test used for hull steel and
weld assessment up until 1985. The HTE test was developed to use less material and require a smaller
explosive charge than the FBE. It induces uniaxial rather than biaxial strain. Evidence on the relative
severity of the FBE and HTE is neutral, and the tests have been used interchangeably; however, the
FBE has a more established provenance in terms of archive data and because of its link to the Pellini
test.
c) For Q1(N) approval the initial crack sizes used in FBE and HTE testing are:
⎯ Plate: 100 mm long by 15 mm deep.

⎯ Weld: 50 mm long by 7.5 mm deep.

21
d) For Q1(N) approval the FBE and HTE acceptance criteria are:
⎯ Plate: No cleavage crack extension (equates to an increase in crack area of less than 50% of the
original notch plus fatigue crack area).
⎯ Weld: Increase in crack surface length less than 50 mm.
e) There are no agreed FBE or HTE initial crack sizes or performance criteria for Q1(N) forgings, casting, or
HAZ.
f) The final option is to carry out dynamic fracture mechanics testing according to BS 7448. The drawback
is that it is very difficult to reach the short loading times relevant to explosive loading in a high rate
servo-hydraulic test machine. Typically, the explosive event time is of the order of 0.5 msec. With the
shallow crack used in weld testing a load capacity of 500 kN is required to break the specimen; and a
high rate servo-hydraulic machine with this load capacity will typically only achieve event times of
between 5 and 15 msecs. Fracture toughness is sensitive to both loading rate and temperature, and one
way to compensate for the lower loading rate is to test at lower temperature.
E.3 Recommended test parameters and acceptance criteria

a) Tables E.1 to E.4 give the recommended test parameters and performance criteria for fracture approval
of a new steel in its various product forms. Advice on testing strategy is given below.
b) The following factors should be borne in mind when selecting a fracture testing strategy for a new steel.
1) The ideal goal is to show safety from cleavage fracture in all product forms. However, this is not
likely to be attainable. In Q1(N), the plate has a good margin of safety against cleavage at all crack
sizes, but the weld will normally show cleavage with deep cracks. The casting may also be
marginal.
2) The HAZ is not tested in Q1(N) approval. This is because tests show that cracks always deviate out
of the hard Q1(N) HAZ into the less tough weld metal. This may not be the case for a new steel.
Indeed the HAZ may prove to be the least tough region in some steels.
3) Explosive tests provide the most convincing demonstration of structural safety, but they are the
most expensive and time consuming tests to perform. Also they use a lot of material and a limited
number of tests may fail to reflect the full scatter in toughness. The optimum testing strategy is likely
to start with dynamic CTOD tests, moving on to explosive tests only when the potential problem
areas in the steel have been identified.
4) The dynamic CTOD is the most commonly available of the tests listed, and is useful because it
gives quantitative fracture mechanics information; but it is the most uncertain of the tests because it
does not fully match the high loading rate experienced under explosive loading. It is thus
inadvisable to have a testing strategy, which relies solely on dynamic CTOD testing with no use of
drop weight or explosive testing.
c) Using the above advice, the independent test house should document a proposed testing programme
addressing the following factors:
1) Product forms to be tested (e.g. plate, weld, HAZ, casting , forging).
2) Order of tests.
3) Test types (e.g. FBE, HTE, CTOD to be used for each product form).
4) Crack sizes for each test.
5) Test temperatures for each test.
6) Acceptance criteria for each test and product form.
The documented testing programme should be agreed with the Design Authority before proceeding.
22
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Order Number: W2166361

Table E.1 – Recommended test parameters for FBE / HTE testing
Plate, forging Weld, HAZ, casting
Test temperature °C -5 -5
Initial crack dimensions mm 100 long by 15 deep 50 long by 7.5 deep

Target deformation level
2 2
% plastic strain
No cleavage (less than 50% Less than 50 mm surface
Acceptance criterion
increase in crack area) crack extension
Table E.2 – Recommended parameters for high rate CTOD testing
Plate, forging Weld, HAZ, casting
Test temperature °C -30 -5
Initial crack dimensions mm 15 deep 7.5 deep
Target Jc MN/m 1 0.35
Acceptance criterion No cleavage below target Jc No cleavage below target Jc
E.4 Flawed Bulge Explosion (FBE) Test

a) The overall dimensions of the test panel are 760 mm by 760 mm.
b) A semi-elliptical notch is inserted in the centre of the panel from one surface and then fatigue cracked
under bending on a laboratory testing machine to give the required final crack dimensions. The notch is
made in the TS direction.
c) The panel is cooled in such a way as to be at –5°C at the time of the test.
d) The panel is placed over a circular die and loaded by an explosive charge of sufficient weight to induce
the required plastic strain. The effect of the circular die is to induce a tensile biaxial strain field on the
surface of the panel containing the fatigue crack. The charge weight is set by calibration trials on un-
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
cracked panels of the same overall dimensions as the cracked panel.
e) After test the panel is heat tinted and broken open to inspect the crack for evidence of cleavage crack
extension during the test.
f) A documented procedure for performing the FBE test is available from the Design Authority.
E.5 Hull Toughness Element (HTE) Test

a) The test is conceptually similar to the FBE test with the following differences:
⎯ The overall dimensions of the panel are 760 mm by 560 mm.
⎯ A square die is used with an opening of 400 mm by 200 mm.
⎯ The strain field induced is uniaxial rather than biaxial.

23
b) Other details of the procedure follow those for the FBE test.
c) Advantages of the HTE test over the FBE test are:
⎯ Smaller specimen size.

⎯ Lower charge weight needed to reach the prescribed strain.
d) A documented procedure for performing the HTE test is available form the Design Authority.
E.6 High rate dynamic fracture mechanics (CTOD) test

a) This test is the closest to conventional fracture mechanics standards. The majority of the test procedure
is covered in published standards, for instance, BS7448.
b) The standard test specimen is a three point bend fracture mechanics specimen with the following
dimensions:
⎯ length, L = 250 mm;

⎯ span, S = 200 mm;
⎯ width, W = 50 mm;
⎯ thickness, B = full product thickness;
⎯ fatigue crack depth, 7.5 or 15 mm dependent on product form.
The specimen is notched in the TL direction.
c) The specimen is loaded in a high rate servo-hydraulic test machine or in an instrumented drop weight
assembly such that the time for loading the specimen to plastic limit load is not more than 15 msec.
(a nominal displacement rate of at least 1m/sec is advised).
d) Specimens are tested at a single temperature or over a range of temperatures to establish the ductile to
brittle transition temperature. Cleavage fracture is shown by any sudden load drop in excess of 5% of
the current load on the load deflection trace. If in doubt, the specimen can be heat tinted after test and
breaking open in liquid nitrogen.
e) Results should be analysed in terms of the fracture mechanics parameter J.

--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
24
Annex F
Fatigue
F.1 Introduction
a) Submarine hulls, like many other engineering structures, are subjected to cyclic loading in service.
Cracks can initiate from stress concentrations, and propagate to failure under cyclic loading. This annex
describes the test procedures for the determination of the fatigue crack growth rates of the proposed
steel and its weldments.
b) The performance criterion is for the proposed steel to exhibit fatigue crack growth performance
comparable to Q1(N). If a substantial deviation from the fatigue performance of Q1(N) is observed, a
decision on whether to proceed with further evaluation of the steel will have to be made by the Design
Authority, based on a reassessment of the submarine fatigue life with the new data.
F.2 Fatigue Tests

a) The method for the determination of the rate of fatigue crack growth as described in BS ISO 12108 will
be followed.
b) Four types of specimen are described in the standard i.e.:
⎯ Three-point single edge notch bend specimen (SENB3)

⎯ Four-point single edge notch bend specimen (SENB4)
⎯ Compact tension specimen (CT)
⎯ Centre-cracked tension specimen (CCT)
c) The orientation of crack growth will be though thickness, which eliminates the choice of the CCT
specimen.
d) It is recommended that the same type of specimen is used for both fatigue in air and corrosion fatigue
tests for ease of correlation of results. The specimen width, W, to be used for the determination of crack
growth rates will be equal to the submarine hull plate thickness. The independent test house will make
the choice of specimen design in consultation with the Design Authority.
e) A sinusoidal stress waveform will be applied to the specimen throughout. Tests will be carried out with a
stress ratio, R= 0.1 and 0.5 (R=σmin/ σmax).
f) Data will be presented in the form of crack growth rate (da/dN) versus stress intensity range (∆K=Kmax-
Kmin) plots.
g) The equations for the stress intensity factor, K, of the aforementioned specimen geometries (Clause
F.2b) are given in BS ISO 12108.
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
h) The crack growth curves presented shall be the average of at least 4 tests.
i) Paris law constants, C, and n, for stage 2 crack growth as described in the equation.
da
= C ⋅ ΔK n
dN
should be determined and reported. The reporting procedure described in BS ISO 12108 will be
followed.

25
j) Table F.1 provides values of the Paris law constants for a number of high strength steels previously
investigated for submarine hull construction.
k) Figure F.1 is a plot of crack growth rate versus stress intensity factor range for Q1(N) steel and BS7910
for marine steels. The graph can be used as guidance for the assessment of new submarine hull steels.
l) The fatigue behaviour of the weldments will also need to be assessed. The procedure to be followed will
be the same procedure as that described for the steel plate.
m) The acceptance criterion is for the weldments to exhibit fatigue crack growth rates comparable to those
of Q1(N) weldments.
n) Appropriate test specimens will be extracted from Kprep welds will as shown in Figure F.2.
Table F.1 – Paris Law Equation Constants For A Range Of High Strength Steels
C
Steel type n
(MPa√m)
R=0 8x10-9 2.833
Q1(N)
R=0.5 1x10-7 2.21
Low R 4.743x10-9 2.833
BS7910
High R 7.909x10-9 2.21
1.0E-02
1.0E-03
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
da/dN (mm/cycle)
1.0E-04
1.0E-05
BS7910 -- Low R
1.0E-06 BS7910 -- High R
Q1(N) -- R=0.1
Q1(N) -- R=0.5
1.0E-07
10 100
ΔK (MPam )
1/2
Figure F.1 – Crack growth rate versus stress intensity range plot for
tests performed in air
26
WELD METAL
ROLLING AND
HAZ HAZ WELDING DIRECTION
SENB specimen
WELD METAL
HAZ
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
ROLLING AND CT specimen

WELDING DIRECTION
Figure F.2 – Position of extraction of, SENB and CT specimens from

Kprep welds for the assessment of fatigue behaviour of weldments

27
Annex G
Stress Corrosion Cracking
G.1 Introduction
a) Submarines hull steels must be resistant to corrosion in seawater. The requirement is for candidate
steels and their weldments not to exhibit stress corrosion cracking (SCC) susceptibility. This Annex
describes the tests and procedures for the assessment of the susceptibility of a new steel to SCC.
b) Two techniques for SCC susceptibility assessment are available:

⎯ The slow strain rate SCC test
⎯ The constant load SEN cantilever beam test.
c) The slow strain rate test, developed in the early 70’s, is now included in the international standards as a
valid test for SCC assessment (BS EN ISO 7539-7). It is a rapid and cost effective test method for
assessing the SCC susceptibility of metallic materials and their weldments.
d) The constant load SEN cantilever beam test is a simple test to perform, but it has disadvantages over
the slow strain rate test in that it is more time consuming. In addition, tests have to be terminated at a
specified time, introducing doubts of whether stress corrosion crack growth would be observed if the test
was allowed to carry on for longer times.
e) The decision on the type of test to be carried out will be made by the Design Authority.
f) In the case of SCC tests of weldments both the weld metal and HAZ susceptibility will be assessed. Only
the SENB specimen can be used due to geometrical limitations. Specimens will be extracted from Kprep
welds as described in Annex F, Figure F.2.
g) SCC tests should be carried out at both free corrosion potential and controlled corrosion potential to
determine the full SCC susceptibility envelope and provide information of any corrosion protection
measures.
G.2 Slow strain rate SCC test

a) This type of test is a relatively severe one since it will frequently promote stress corrosion failure where
other modes of stressing plain specimens do not promote cracking and in this sense it belongs in a
similar category to tests on precracked specimens.
b) Compared to constant load SCC tests on precracked cantilever beam specimens the slow dynamic
strain application has two main advantages. It apparently assists the SCC initiation, and the test is not
terminated at some arbitrary time since failure will usually result in not more than 2 days either by ductile
fracture or by SCC.
c) The slow strain rate SCC test is performed on cylindrical tensile specimens, 4.75mm diameter and
152mm long, incorporating a necked region 2.5mm diameter and 12.7mm gauge length, as shown in
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Figure G.1.
d) Specimens will be extracted from the plate in the transverse direction.
e) The specimens are covered with a protective lacquer, except for the gauge length, which is polished and
degreased prior to testing. A cell containing the test environment (in this case natural seawater) is then
placed around the specimen, Figure G.2.
28
Ø 2.5 mm x 12.7mm gauge length
Ø 4.75 mm
63 mm 89 mm
Figure G.1 – Slow strain rate SCC specimen
f) The specimens are loaded in tension at relatively slow strain rates (typically 10-4 to 10-7 s-1) until failure.
The test procedure is described in detail in ASTM-STP 665 and BS EN ISO 7539-7.
g) After the test has terminated the reduction in area at the fracture point in the gauge length is measured
and the fracture surfaces examined in a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The gauge length region
is also examined for surface micro-cracking by optical microscopy.
h) Tests will be carried out at free corrosion potential (fcp), initially at a strain rate of 10-6s-1. If no SCC
susceptibility is observed further tests at strain rates of 10-5s-1 and 10-7s-1 will be carried out. This is
necessary, as SCC susceptibility is strain rate dependent. Two specimens per strain rate will be tested.
A total of 6 specimens will therefore be needed.
i) Tests under controlled corrosion potential (ccp) at a strain rate of 10-6s-1 will also be carried out. The
arrangement for these tests is shown in Figure G.2.
Calomel Potentiometer
electrolytic electrode
bridge
Linear sweep
generator
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
Platinum
counter Potentiostat
electrode
Saturated
KCl solution
Data acquisition unit
seawater
: Free corrosion potential tests

: Controlled corrosion potential tests
Figure G.2 – Experimental arrangement for slow strain rate

tests under free or controlled corrosion potential

29
j) Two tests will be performed at potential levels above fcp and two below fcp. A total of four tests will
therefore be carried out.
k) If the steel is SCC susceptible, the potential at which immunity to SCC is observed will be reported.
G.3 Constant load cantilever beam SCC test

a) The constant load cantilever beam SCC test employs a single edge notched specimen (SENB3) as
described in BS ISO 12108 for fatigue testing, see Annex F of this Def Stan.
b) Prior to testing, specimens are fatigue pre-cracked to produce a sharp starter crack.
c) The test arrangement is relatively simple and involves rigidly clamping one end of the specimen and
applying a constant load at the other end, Figure G.3.
d) The specimen is surrounded by a cell containing the test environment.
e) The duration of each test can vary from less than one hour to about 42 days (≈1000hrs) depending on
the initial applied load. For long duration tests a means of circulating the environment is needed and the
environment should be renewed every 7 days.
f) The crack advance will be accurately measured by the potential drop technique (either direct current
(DCPD) or alternating current (ACPD) potential drop technique).
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
g) If at the end of a suitable period (usually 1000 hrs) no indication of cracking is observed, the test is
terminated.
h) After completion of the test the specimens are cooled in liquid nitrogen and opened up to reveal the
fracture surface.
i) The crack depths are measured through a travelling microscope and the final crack length, used to
calculate the crack extension, is determined by the weighted nine point average method.
G.4 Performance criteria

a) The criterion of acceptance of the proposed steel (and its weldments) is the demonstration of immunity
or minimal SCC susceptibility at free corrosion potential.
b) In the case of slow strain rate tests assessment of the steel’s SCC susceptibility is based on the time to
failure, reduction in area and mode of fracture.
c) In the case of constant load cantilever beam tests, assessment of the steel’s SCC susceptibility is based
on evidence of crack growth as well as crack growth velocity.
G.5 Reporting
A detailed report describing the tests carried out will be compiled by the independent test house. The report
will contain the SCC test results of both the plate and its weldments. In the case where the material is not
immune to SCC, the corrosion potential at which immunity has been observed should be reported.
30
Pulley
Lever
arm
Test
environment
Figure G.3 – Constant load cantilever beam SCC test arrangement

--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

31
Annex H
Corrosion Fatigue
H.1 Introduction
It is well-known that many metallic materials in the presence of an aggressive environment, such as
seawater, display an enhancement of fatigue crack growth rates over those observed in air. Such behaviour
is termed corrosion fatigue (CF) and it is important that the sensitivity a new steel (and its weldments) to CF
is assessed.
H.2 CF Test Procedure

a) The procedure and specimens used for corrosion fatigue tests are the same as those described in
Annex H for fatigue tests in air.
b) For corrosion fatigue tests the selected specimen (SENB or CT) will be surrounded by a cell containing
the test environment (seawater). In the case of weldments specimens (SENB or CT) will be extracted
from Kprep welds as shown earlier in Annex F, Figure F.2.
c) A facility for continuous circulation of the test environment around the specimens should be available.
The test environment should be renewed every 2 days throughout the duration of the tests.
d) The loading waveform will be sinusoidal and the test frequency low enough to allow corrosion reactions
to take place. It is recommended that a test frequency <0.01 Hz should be used.
e) As described in Annex F the data will be presented as a plot of crack growth rate (da/dN) versus stress
intensity range ∆K (where ∆K= Kmax-Kmin).
f) The curves between the tests in air and in seawater will be compared to assess the crack growth rate
enhancement. Typically the average of 3 – 4 tests is obtained to compensate for scatter.
H.3 Performance Criteria

a) There are no standard performance criteria for CF crack growth rates in submarine steels. The
performance criterion is that the proposed steels (and their weldments), tested in seawater at the free
corrosion potential, should exhibit a fatigue crack growth rate enhancement over tests in air, comparable
to that observed for Q1(N) steel, Figure H.1.
b) If a substantial deviation from the corrosion fatigue performance of Q1(N) is observed a decision on
whether to proceed with further evaluation of the steel will have to be made by the Design Authority
based on a reassessment of the submarine fatigue life with the new data.
Table H.1 – Paris’ Law Equation Constants for a Range of High

Strength Steels Tested in Seawater at the Free Corrosion Potential
C
Steel type n
(MPa√m)
R=0.1 1x10-6 2
Q1(N)
R=0.5 3x10-7 2.21
BS7910 72.73x10-9 3
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
32
1.0E+00
1.0E-01
1.0E-02
da.dN (mm/cycle)
1.0E-03
1.0E-04
BS7910 -- Low & high R

1.0E-05 Q1(N) -- R=0.1
Q1(N) -- R=0.5
Q1(N) --R=0.1 in air
1.0E-06
10 100
ΔK (MPam1/2)
Figure H.1 – Crack growth rate versus stress intensity range plot for Q1(N)
tests performed in seawater and reference line for tests in air
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

33
Annex I
Bauschinger Effect
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
I.1 Introduction
a) This Annex describes the tests required for the sensitivity of a new steel to the Bauschinger effect. The
Bauschinger effect refers to the phenomenon of reduced compressive yield strength due to a previously
imposed tensile yield. Tensile yield occurs in submarine hull steels during the bending of plates to
shape.
b) There is no standard methodology for assessing the Bauschinger effect in metals. The most common
method employed is a uniaxial yield test. The test involves prestraining in tension (or compression) a
tensile specimen followed by testing in compression (or tension). The reduction in compressive (or
tensile) strength is then recorded.
c) It is critical in this type of test that no buckling is introduced. A modified Haigh specimen has been
utilised in the past by QinetiQ to assess the Bauschinger effect in Q1(N) and Q2(N) steels. It is
recommended that a similar approach is adopted to assure consistency of results.
I.2 Bauschinger Test Procedure

a) The specimen design used for the assessment of the Bauschinger effect is a modified Haigh type
specimen with threaded ends and dimensions as shown in Figure I.1. This type of specimen is chosen
to minimise the risk of buckling under compressive loading. The diameter of the 12.5mm parallel section
should be machined to an accuracy of ± 0.001mm. The specimen will be extracted from the plate in the
LT direction.
b) The applied strain is measured via diametrically opposed strain gauges placed in the mid section of the
specimen gauge length.
c) The strain gauges apart from providing data for the load – strain curve also provide information on
whether the specimen is loaded axially (deviation of strain output from either strain gauge is an
indication of bending).
d) The specimen is placed between the chucks of a universal tensile testing machine and at zero load the
strain gauges are calibrated and zeroed. Loading axiality is very important, especially for compressive
loading, and extreme care should be taken to achieve this during machine set up.
e) The specimen is then loaded in tension (or compression) at constant strain rate to a predetermined
strain level. A cross-head movement of 0.004mm/sec is used throughout the test. The 0.2% proof stress
of the specimen is then determined, see Figure I.2.
f) The direction of loading is then reversed and the specimen is loaded to compression (or tension) to
obtain the 0.2% proof stress in the reverse loading condition.
g) In each case the 0.2% proof stress is determined from the stress – strain curve.
h) Tests will be carried out in both tensile and compressive initial prestrain.
i) From these data a curve can be constructed of the Bauschinger effect factor (BEF) for given amounts of
plastic prestrain, which allows the easy assessment of 0.2% proof stress reduction.
34
0.2% proof stress after prestrain

BEF =
0.2% proof stress before prestrain
150mm
Ø12.5 mm
M25x3
Strain gauge
12.5mm // length
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
TOLERANCE : As for BS EN 10002-1 : 2001 (± 0.5%)
SURFACE FINISH : As for BS EN 10002-1: 2001. Not to be polished
Figure I.1 – Specimen geometry for Bauschinger effect tests

Tensile
Prestrain
stress
0.2%
0.2% strain
Compressive
stress
Figure I.2 – Stress strain plot during Bauschinger effect tests to determine
reduction of 0.2% proof in compression after yield in tension.

35
Annex J
Fabrication Trials
a) Once the tests described in Annexes B to I have been completed, and the results are accepted as
satisfactory by the Design Authority, a fabrication trial should be initiated.
b) The aim of the trial is to establish the weldability of the proposed material under realistic fabrication
conditions and geometric weld constraints.
c) Details of the design of the structure will be decided by the Design Authority.
d) The structure will be subjected to detailed NDE tests to establish the integrity of the fabrication method.
e) Once NDE has been completed sections of weld should be extracted and subjected to Charpy and
tensile testing.
f) At this stage evaluation of the fracture properties of castings and forgings should be carried out. (This
applies if the castings and forgings are to be of the same steel proposed for hull construction.)
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---
36
Inside Rear Cover
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---

©Crown Copyright 2012
Copying Only as Agreed with DStan
Defence Standards are published by and obtainable from:
Defence Equipment and Support
UK Defence Standardization
Kentigern House
65 Brown Street
GLASGOW
G2 8EX
DStan Helpdesk
Tel: 44 (0) 141 224 2531/2
Fax: 44 (0) 141 224 2503
Internet e-mail: enquiries@dstan.mod.uk
File Reference
The DStan file reference relating to work on this standard is D/DStan/69/02/874.
Contract Requirements
When Defence Standards are incorporated into contracts users are responsible for their correct
application and for complying with contractual and statutory requirements. Compliance with a Defence
Standard does not in itself confer immunity from legal obligations.
Revision of Defence Standards

Defence Standards are revised as necessary by an up issue or amendment. It is important that users
of Defence Standards should ascertain that they are in possession of the latest issue or amendment.
Information on all Defence Standards can be found on the DStan Website www.dstan.mod.uk,
updated weekly and supplemented regularly by Standards in Defence News (SID News). Any person
who, when making use of a Defence Standard encounters an inaccuracy or ambiguity is requested to
notify UK Defence Standardization (DStan) without delay in order that the matter may be investigated
and appropriate action taken. Sponsors and authors shall refer to Def Stan 00-00 part 2 before
proceeding with any standards work.
--`,,,,`,,,,```,,`,``,,`-`-``,```,,,`---


DEF - STAN - 02-874 Testing Route For The Assessment of New Submarine Hull Steels

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEF - STAN - 02-874 Testing Route For The Assessment of New Submarine Hull Steels

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ministry of Defence

Defence Standard 02-874

Testing Route for the Assessment of

Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

4 Terms and Definitions.......................................................................................................................2

Annex E Fracture ............................................................................................................................................21

Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

Amd No Date Text Affected Signature and Date

This standard is raised to Issue 2 to update its content.

This standard supersedes the following:

Def Stan 02-874 Issue 1 17 August 2004

Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

Categories of Naval Defence Standard

a) Category 1. If not applied may have a Critical affect on the following:

b) Category 2. If not applied may have a Significant affect on the following:

c) Category 3. If not applied may have a Minor affect on the following:

a) British Standards British Standards Institution,

b) Defence Standards Defence Equipment and Support

c) Other documents Tender or Contract Sponsor to advise.

Health and Safety

(There is no relevant information)

Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

Copyright British Defence Standards

Testing Route for the Assessment of New Submarine Hull

JSP430 MOD Ship Safety Management System Handbook

Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

4 Terms and Definitions

Copyright British Defence Standards

Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

Proposed submarine hull steel

COTS consumables ? NO Consumable development costs HIGH

Low magnetic signature under both

FRACTURE TOUGHNESS - PLATE & WELDS REJECT

FATIGUE - PLATE & WELDS

Fatigue CGR determination (BS ISO 12108)

ENVIRONMENT SENSITIVE CRACKING - PLATE & WELDS

non susceptible SCC tests susceptible

CF tests High CGRs

Table 1 – Test procedure overview - PLATE

Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

Table 2 – Test procedure overview – WELDS, FORGINGS, CASTINGS

NOTE 1 Tensile strength >550MPa, Charpy impact >100J at -20°C (castings)

NOTE 3 Performance criterion: CGR ≤ CGR for Q1(N) steel welds.

d) Figure 2 applies to any slab irrespective of production route.

FBE or HTE FBE or HTE

Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

9 Materials, Manufacturing Processes and Test Methods

A.1 Information Pack

⎯ name, address and brief history of works,

b) Information should also be provided detailing material properties as follows:

⎯ longitudinal, transverse and through thickness tensile properties,

Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

A.2 Chemical composition and weldability

T = 213 ⋅ (C.E.) − 26.5

A.3 Microstructure and magnetisation

Table A.1 – Magnetic Properties of Steel’s Microstructural Phases

A.4 Composition and corrosion susceptibility

0.2 UXW HY 100

Copyright British Defence Standards Order Number: W2166361

B.2 Test Coupons

B.3 Tensile strength

Coupons A, B,C & D (Figure 2):

B.4 Charpy impact