Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Structures and Dynamics

Development of a Probabilistic Methodology for Predicting Hot Corrosion Fatigue Crack Growth Life of Gas Turbine Engine Disks

[+] Author and Article Information
Kwai S. Chan

Fellow ASME

Jonathan P. Moody

Southwest Research Institute,
San Antonio, TX 78238

Contributed by the Structures and Dynamics Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received August 15, 2013; final manuscript received August 20, 2013; published online November 1, 2013. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 136(2), 022505 (Nov 01, 2013) (8 pages) Paper No: GTP-13-1306; doi: 10.1115/1.4025555 History: Received August 15, 2013; Revised August 20, 2013

Advanced Ni-based gas turbine disks are expected to operate at higher service temperatures in aggressive environments for longer time durations. Exposures of Ni-based alloys to alkaline-metal salts and sulfur compounds at elevated temperatures can lead to hot corrosion fatigue crack growth in engine disks. Type II hot corrosion involves the formation and growth of corrosion pits in Ni-based alloys at a temperature range of 650 °C to 750 °C. Once formed, these corrosion pits can serve as stress concentration sites where fatigue cracks can initiate and propagate to failure under subsequent cyclic loading. In this paper, a probabilistic methodology is developed for predicting the corrosion fatigue crack growth life of gas turbine engine disks made from a powder-metallurgy Ni-based superalloy (ME3). The key features of the approach include: (1) a pit growth model that describes the depth and width of corrosion pits as a function of exposure time, (2) a cycle-dependent crack growth model for treating fatigue, and (3) a time-dependent crack growth model for treating corrosion. This set of deterministic models is implemented into a probabilistic life-prediction code called DARWIN. Application of this approach is demonstrated for predicting corrosion fatigue crack growth life in a gas turbine disk based on the ME3 properties from the literature. The results of this study are used to assess the conditions that control the transition of a corrosion pit to a fatigue crack and to identify the pertinent material parameters influencing corrosion fatigue life and disk reliability.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Sidhu, T. S., Prakash, S., and Agrawal, R. D., 2006, “Hot Corrosion and Performance of Nickel-Based Coatings,” Curr. Sci., 90(1), pp. 41–47.
Chiang, K. T., Pettit, F. S., and Meier, G. H., 1983, “Low Temperature Hot Corrosion,” NACE-6, pp. 519–530.
Rapp, R., 2002, “Hot Corrosion of Materials: A Fluxing Mechanism?,” Corros. Sci., 44, pp. 209–221. [CrossRef]
Leyens, C., Wright, I. G., and Pint, B. A., 1999, “Hot Corrosion of Nickel-Based Alloys in Biomass-Derived Fuel Simulated Atmosphere,” Elevated Temperature Coatings: Science and Technology III, J. M.Hampikian and N. B.Dahotre, eds., TMS, Warrendale, PA, pp. 79–90.
Gabb, T. P., Telesman, J., Hazel, B., and Mourer, D. P., 2010, “The Effects of Hot Corrosion Pits on the Fatigue Resistance of a Disk Superalloy,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 19(1), pp. 77–89. [CrossRef]
Franklin, D. B. and Nelson, E. E., 1981, “Corrosion Fatigue of Inconel 718 and Incoloy 903,” NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, AL, NASA Report No. TM-82426.
Groh, J. R. and Duvelius, R. W., 2001, “Influence of Corrosion Pitting on Alloy 718 Fatigue Capability,” Superalloys 718, 625, 706 and Various Derivatives, L. A.Loria, ed., TMS, Warrendale, PA, pp. 583–592.
Encinas-Oropesa, A., Drew, G. L., Hardy, M. C., Leggett, A. J., Nicholls, J. R., and Simms, N. J., 2008, “Effects of Oxidation and Hot Corrosion in a Nickel Disc Alloy,” Superalloy 2008, R. C.Reed, K. A.Green, P.Caron, T. P.Gabb, M. G.Fahrmann, E. S.Huron, and S. A.Woodard, eds., TMS, Warrendale, PA, pp. 609–618.
Gabb, T. P., Telesman, J., Kantzos, P. T., Smith, J. W., and Browning, P. F., 2004, Effects of High Temperature Exposures on Fatigue Life of Disk Superalloys, K. A.Green, T. M.Pollock, H.Harada, T. E.Howson, R. C.Reed, J. J.Schirra, and S.Walston, eds., TMS, Warrendale, PA, pp. 269–274.
Sriraman, M. R. and Pidaparti, R. M., 2010, “Crack Initiation Life of Materials Under Combined Pitting Corrosion and Cyclic Loading,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 19(1), pp. 7–12. [CrossRef]
Harlow, D. G. and Wei, R. P., 1994, “Probability Approach for Prediction of Corrosion and Corrosion Fatigue Life,” AIAA J., 32, pp. 2073–2079. [CrossRef]
Dolley, E. J., Lee, B., and Wei, R. P., 2000, “The Effect of Pitting Corrosion on Fatigue Life,” Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct., 23, pp. 555–560. [CrossRef]
Chen, G. S., Gao, M., Harlow, D. G., and Wei, R. P., 1994, “Corrosion and Corrosion Fatigue of Airframe Aluminum Alloys,” NASA Conf. Publ.3274, pp. 157–173.
Wang, Q. Y., Pidaparti, R. M., and Palakal, M. J., 2001, “Comparative Study of Corrosion-Fatigue in Aircraft Materials,” AIAA J., 39(2), pp. 325–330. [CrossRef]
Gabb, T. P., Telesman, J., Kantzos, P. T., and O'Connor, K., 2002, “Characterization of the Temperature Capabilities of Advanced Disk Alloy ME3,” NASA Glenn Research Center, NASA Report No. TM-2002-211796.
Gao, Y., Kumar, M., Nalla, R. K., and Ritchie, R. O., 2005, “High-Cycle Fatigue of Nickel-Based Superalloy ME# at Ambient and Elevated Temperatures: Role of Grain Boundary Engineering,” Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 36A, pp. 3325–3333. [CrossRef]
Southwest Research Institute, 2011, “DARWIN® User's Guide,” San Antonio, TX.
Wu, Y. T., Enright, M. P., and Millwater, H. R., 2002, “Probabilistic Methods for Design Assessment of Reliability With Inspection,” AIAA J., 40(5), (2002), pp. 937–946. [CrossRef]
Ishihara, S., Saka, S., Nan, Z. Y., Goshima, T., and Sunada, S., 2006, “Prediction of Corrosion Fatigue Lives of Aluminum Alloy on the Basis of Corrosion Pit Growth Law,” Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct., 29, pp. 472–480. [CrossRef]
Balsone, S. J., 1985, “The Effect of Stress and Hot Corrosion on Nickel-Base Superalloys,” M.S. thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson AFB, Dayton, OH.
Lindley, T. C., McIntyre, P., and Trant, P. J., 1982, “Fatigue Crack Initiation at Corrosion Pits,” Met. Technol. (London), 9, pp. 135–142. [CrossRef]
Peterson, R. E., 1974, Stress Concentration Factors, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Kitagawa, H. and Takahashi, S.1976, “Applicability of Fracture Mechanics to Very Small Cracks or the Cracks in the Early Stage,” 2nd International Conference on Mechanical Behavior of Materials (ICM-2), Boston, MA, August 16–20, American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH, pp. 627–631.
Wei, R. P. and Landes, J. D., 1969, “Correlation Between Sustained-Load and Fatigue Crack Growth in High-Strength Steels,” Mater. Res. Stand., 44(46), pp. 25–27.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Pit depth or width as a function of stress based on the LCF specimens of ME3. The low stress ground (LSG) specimens contained little or no residual stresses, while the shot-peened specimens contained residual surfaces which were fully characterized by Gabb et al. [5].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematics of time-dependent pit and crack growth in Ni-based superalloys during corrosion fatigue at elevated temperatures. Modified from Wang et al. [14].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Computed pit aspect ratio 2 d/w and normalized driving force ΔKKth compared to the experimental data as a function of the pit width: (a) LSG specimens without residual stresses, and (b) SP specimens with residual stresses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison of the computed pit aspect ratio 2 d/w and the normalized driving force K/Kth compared to the experimental data as a function of the pit width

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Pit aspect ratio 2 d/w and computed kt as a function of the pit width

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison of the pit growth rates of the depth d· and width w· against the fatigue crack growth rate da/dt = f da/dN, as a function of the pit width. Pit growth dominates at ΔK < Kth, while fatigue crack growth dominates at ΔKKth.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

A comparison of the damage mechanisms for Type II hot corrosion fatigue and pure fatigue in a Kitagawa diagram: (a) Type II hot corrosion fatigue, and (b) pure fatigue. Experimental data are from Gabb et al. [5].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of the measured and computed da/dN response of ME3 at several temperatures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of the computed and measured da/dt response of ME3 at several temperatures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Fatigue crack growth rate da/dN as a function of frequency for ME3 at ΔK = 16.5 MPa (m1/2) and R = 0.5

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

A schematic illustration of the dependence of the population of critical pit size on hot corrosion time and how it affects the risk of corrosion fatigue crack growth in an engine disk

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Fracture model superimposed upon a generic gas turbine engine

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

DARWIN pit and crack growth simulation of Type II hot corrosion fatigue crack growth in a generic ME3 disk

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

DARWIN risk simulation of Type II hot corrosion fatigue crack growth in a generic ME3 disk




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In